k^mmbtiJmm 



mm 



Mdi 



■®.®Oa^''-:.'.i! - 






ma 



A A A A 



aAAaAAAaAa 



'&W^MSfsMf\fS^ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 



UNITED STATES OP AMERICA. 



TO 



• ; aAAAA 



aT&T&T^T^ 



^ffMiiTO 






MmMM^M 



: ■: ^aD.o WftwAnQH^ . a*i & & &£&££$£ . 






KTO 



AAA/ 






tiHMU 






'm^h^mmmfsmmn 



/^ A a /v f A 









AAr.:.AA/.)A/>. 



MWWAW 



A A a A A 



*^Afi£&Gfifift& 



™«i 



iMiii 






KIllSMlM^MfflBma^mp: 






''AaA 



aAAa/ 



2mm 



"■ ^ rv Af/iRpiP A £ A A A /* ■ /* 



aAaAAAAA : 






/*?/£> 



f wwqnwjies to tawanwH. 



THE 



SCRIPTURAL TERMS 



OF 



ADMISSION TO THE LOED'S SUPPER. 



BY 






REV. ALBERT Nf ARNOLD, D.D. 



Now I praise you, brethren, that ye * * keep the ordinances, as I 
delivered them to vou." — 1 Cor. xi. 2. 



BOSTON: 
COULD AND LINCOLN, 

59 WASHINGTON STREET. 

NEW YORK: SHELDON AND COMPANY. 
CINCINNATI: GEORGE S. BLANCHARD. 

1861. 



.***£ 



A? 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1860, by 

GOULD AND LINCOLN, 
In the Cleric's Office of the District Court of Massachusetts. 



STEREOTYPED AND PRINTED BT 
OEO. C. RAND AND AVERY, 3 COENHILL. 



3 



PREFATORY NOTE 



The substance of the following pages 
was read as an Essay before the Annual 
Conference of the Baptist Ministers of Mas- 
sachusetts, at Middleboro', October 30, 1860. 
With a few changes and additions, it is 
now published, at the request of those who 
heard it. 

Westboro', Nov. 16, 1860. 



CONTENTS. 



Page 

NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE 9 



I. 

FIRST PREREQUISITE: — AVOWAL OF DIS- 

CIPLESHIP 12 

II. 

SECOND PREREQUISITE:— BAPTISM ... 16 

EXAMPLES OF SCRIPTURE 18 

NATURE AND IMPORT OF THE TWO ORDINANCES . 20 

PEDOBAPTIST TESTIMONIES 25 

ROBERT HALl/S VIEW 27 

OBJECTIONS AGAINST IT 29 

1. Contrary to Belief and Practice of all Churches, 29 

2. Assumes an Unscriptural Inequality between 

the two Ordinances 30 

3. Tends to do away with Baptism 32 

4. Tends to do away with the Visible Church alto- 

gether ' . 32 



VI CONTENTS. 

III. 

Pago 

THIRD PREREQUISITE : — CHURCH MEM- 
BERSHIP 36 

THE LORD'S SUPPER A SYMBOL OF CHURCH FEL- 
LOWSHIP 43 

OBJECTION ANSWERED 46 

SUPPOSED PRIMITIVE LAXITY 49 

PROMINENCE OF THE CHURCH RELATION IN THE 

NEW TESTAMENT 52 

THE WORD " CHURCH " NOT USED LOOSELY . . 55 

UNIFORMITY IN PRIMITIVE CHURCH USAGES . . 57 

STRICTNESS RATHER THAN LAXITY 58 

MEMBERSHIP IN ONE CHURCH NOT MEMBERSHIP 

IN ALL CHURCHES 61 



IV. 



FOURTH PREREQUISITE : — AN ORDERLY 

WALK 63 

I. IMMORAL CONDUCT 65 

II. DISOBEDIENCE TO THE COMMANDS OF CHRIST, 67 

Pedobaptists chargeable with this in respect to 

one Command . . 68 



CONTENTS. VII 

Pago 

III. HERESY 70 

Pedobaptists chargeable with Grave Errors ... 72 
Mixed Communion neutralizes our Protest against 
these Errors 75 

IV. SCHISM 77 

Mixed Communion tends to Schism 78 

An Objection answered 80 

Recapitulation 81 



VARIOUS OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED ... 82 

I. PRIMITIVE RULES NO LONGER APPLICABLE . . 82 

The Laws of Christ have not changed 84 

Return to the Primitive Order desirable .... 84 

II. BAPTISM BUT AN EXTERNAL RITE 87 

III. PEDOBAPTISTS THINK THEMSELVES BAPTIZED, 89 

IV. STRICT COMMUNION A HINDRANCE TO UNION, 90 

Truth before Union 91 

A Good Conscience before Union 92 

Allegiance to Christ before Union 93 

Baptists bound to be Strict in regard to the Ordi- 
nances 93 

Baptists not responsible for the Separation ... 94 



VIII CONTENTS. 

Page 

Baptism, no less than the Lord's Supper, a Symbol 
of Church Union 96 

Mixed Communion not a Cure, but a Cause, of Dis- 
union 97 

Mixed Communion a Fictitious Expression of 
Union . . . . 102 

V. WHY NOT MAKE AN EXCEPTION IN FAVOR 

OP BAPTIZED MEMBERS OF PEDOBAPTIST 
CHURCHES'? 103 

VI. WHY NOT DISPENSE WITH THE RULE IN EX- 

TREME CASES'? 106 

VII. ALLEGED INCONSISTENCY OF OUR PRACTICE, 108 

1. We expect to Commune with Pedobaptists in 

Heaven 108 

2. We reject the Better and receive the Worse . . 109 

3. We recognize Pedobaptists as Brethren in many- 

ways 112 

VIII. ALLEGED IMPOLICY OF OUR PRACTICE . . 104 
CONCLUSION 117 



PKEREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 



NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE. 

It is conceded at the outset that the terms 
of admission to the Lord's Supper, or the quali- 
fications required of all who participate in that 
sacred feast, are not matters of explicit and 
formal statement in the Scriptures, and that 
we must ascertain what the will of the Lord 
is in this matter as well as we can from par- 
ticular examples, from general principles, and 
from incidental allusions, contained in Scripture. 
Nor need we be particularly surprised or grieved 
that it should be so ; for the same is true in 
regard to many other important matters per- 
taining to Christian doctrine and duty, and to 



10 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION". 

the order of the church of Christ. It is so in 
regard to the time and manner of keeping the 
Lord's day holy unto him; and it is so — to 
refer to a more pertinent illustration still — in 
regard to the qualifications for receiving bap- 
tism. It seems very plain to us Baptists, that 
the scriptural terms of admission to baptism 
are repentance and faith ; and yet we do not 
find anywhere in Scripture the express words, 
"Let every penitent believer be baptized, and 
let none but penitent believers be baptized ; " 
nor even precisely that form of verbal warrant 
which we sometimes hear quoted as Scripture, 
"Repent, believe, and be baptized." Yet we 
are none the less confident, and none the less 
justified in maintaining our denominational views 
in regard to that rite, and in insisting upon these 
qualifications in all who come to us asking for 
baptism. For the scriptural warrant for requir- 
ing these qualifications for baptism, though not 
thus direct and explicit, is sufficient and decisive. 
I do not say that the proper qualifications for 
admission to the Lord's Supper are equally clear 
from the Scriptures ; but I say that they are to 
be ascertained and proved by the same hind 



NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE. 11 

of evidence. We are not entitled to demand 
any particular degree of plainness, or measure 
of fulness, in the evidence of what the Lord 
requires of us in any case ; it is sufficient that 
we can ascertain it by searching the Scriptures ; 
and if the indexes of our duty which we find 
there, whether few or many, all point in the 
same direction, — if, though appropriate proof- 
texts be not so numerous as we could wish, the 
tenor of Scripture is unambiguous and self- 
consistent, — we ought to be content. If we 
are prepared to be content with this kind and 
degree of evidence, I think we shall have no 
reason to complain that it is wanting in regard 
to the case before us, — the proper qualifica- 
tions FOR ADMISSION TO THE LORD'S SUPPER. 



l£ PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 



AVOWAL OF DISCIPLESHIP. 

The first qualification which I mention as re- 
quired, on scriptural principles, in those who 
come to the Lord's table, is, that they be avowed 
disciples of Christ. There is no apparent reason 
why any others should wish to partake of the 
Lord's Supper; its nature and design are such 
that no others can suitably partake of it ^ nor can 
any others find in Scripture any warrant for par- 
taking of it. At the time when the Lord insti- 
tuted this ordinance, only his chosen disciples 
were with him. He sat down with the twelve} 
He took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and 
gave it to the disciples. It was to them he said, 
"Take, eat; this is my body;" and likewise, 
" Drink ye all of it." 2 It was to them he said, 
" This do in remembrance of me." 3 

The question whether or not Judas was pres- 
ent, and partook of the bread and the wine, does 
not seem to me to have any serious importance. 
If he was present and partook, it was in the char- 
acter of a disciple, regarded as such by the other 

1 Matt. xxvi. 20. 2 vs. 2t>, 27. 3 Luke xxii. 19. 



AVOWAL OF DISCIPIESHIP. IS 

disciples, and not yet disowned as such by his 
Master. If he did not partake, but went out 
before the Supper was instituted, which I regard 
as the more probable view, then this circumstance 
may be considered as an additional confirmation 
of the truth that this observance was designed by 
the Lord to be limited to his avowed disciples. 1 
Invariably, wherever the Lord's Supper is 
spoken of or alluded to, those who are repre- 
sented as partaking of it, if not explicitly declared 
to be disciples of Christ, are plainly assumed to 
be such, and to partake as such. 2 This is very 
emphatically the case with the references to this 
ordinance in the tenth and eleventh chapters of 
the first epistle to the Corinthians. " The cup of 
blessing which we bless, is it not the communion 
of the blood of Christ ? The bread which Ave 



1 The order of the narrative in Luke xxii. 19-23, is in favor of placing his 
departure after the institution of the supper. But the giving of the sop, the sign 
by which he was declared to be the betrayer of Christ, seems to belong more fitly 
to the Paschal Supper, and is referred to in connection with it by both Matthew 
(xxvi. 23) and Mark (xiv. 20). And John says (xiii. 30) that Judas went out 
immediately after this sign was given. It seems to me that these indications of 
the order of events in three of the gospels, especially the very definite one the 
gospel of John, are more decisive than the order of the narrative in Luke. It is 
well known that the evangelists do not always record events in the exact order 
of their occurence. 

2 See Acts ii. 42. 



14 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

break, is it not the communion of the body of 
Christ ? " x This is surely a very emphatic way of 
saying, that this rite implies, on the part of those 
who observe it, fellowship with Christ, and a par- 
ticipation of the benefits of his propitiatory sacri- 
fice on the cross for us. The whole representation 
in the eleventh chapter is of a kindred character. 
The warning against eating and drinking unwor- 
thily, 2 the injunction to examine themselves, 3 and 
the distinction expressly recognized between those 
who partake and the world, 4 manifestly presup- 
pose the character of discipleship on the part of 
the communicants. Indeed, as the epistle is 
formally inscribed to those who are recognized as 
disciples of Christ, 5 whatever directions it contains 
in regard to the observance of the Lord's Supper 
are naturally understood as applicable and ad- 
dressed to persons of this character. 

That such an avowal, express or implied, is 
an indispensable qualification for approach to the 
Lord's table, will hardly be denied by any but 
those who regard this ordinance as a means of 
grace to the unconverted. This view prevails 
generally in the unreformed churches, both the 

1 Ch. x. 1G. 2 vs. 27, 29. 3 v. 28. 4 v. 32. 5 Ch. i. 2. 



AVOWAL OF DISCIPLESHIP. 15 

Latin and the Greek. It prevails also to a con- 
siderable extent, I believe, among Episcopalians, 
Presbyterians, and Methodists. It did prevail, 
also, as is well known, among the Congregation- 
alists of New England before the days of Jona- 
than Edwards. In proportion as evangelical 
views are entertained in regard to the nature of 
regeneration and discipleship, this position must 
be abandoned. In proportion as regeneration is 
held to be a gradual process, the development of 
a germ of natural goodness in man, or of divine 
grace implanted in baptism, this position will be 
retained. Yet the Episcopalian, who exhorts the 
people to repent of their sins, or else not come to 
that holy table, and who tells them it is 
requisite that no man should come but with a 
full trust in God's mercy, and with a quiet con- 
science; 1 the Presbyterian, who insists on the 
desire to renounce sin, and the determination to 
lead a godly life; 2 and the Methodist, who ad- 
mits into the preparatory class only those who 
profess to be seeking salvation ; 3 — all require in sub- 
stance some avowal of incipient discipleship, as we 
might call it, such as their views of regeneration 

1 Book of Common Prayer. 2 Directory for Worship. 3 Book of Discipline. 



16 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

and conversion warrant. But strictly evangelical 
Pedobaptists, with whom we have chiefly to deal 
in the present controversy, agree with us in re- 
garding the Lord's Supper as designed only for 
the avowed disciples of Christ. Yet I cannot 
forbear to remark, in passing, that I see no con- 
sistent ground on which those who regard Bap- 
tism as a means of grace to the unconverted, as 
I suppose all consistent Pedobaptists do, can ob- 
ject to the views of those who regard the Lord's 
Supper in the same light. 



II. 

BAPTISM. 

In addition to a general avowal of being dis- 
ciples of Christ, I mention baptism, as a second 
qualification required, according to the Scrip- 
tures, in all communicants at the Lord's table. 

There is no record of the baptism of any of 
the twelve, or eleven, disciples who partook with 
Jesus at the original institution of the Lord's 
Supper. But we have proof that one or two of 



BAPTISE. 17 

them had been disciples of John. 1 It is probable, 
that all of them had been ; for our Lord would 
not be likely to choose his apostles from among 
those who had not obeyed the call to repentance, 
and received the baptism, of that illustrious har- 
binger, who was sent before him on purpose to 
prepare the way of the Lord. 2 This inference is 
greatly strengthened by the circumstance, that 
the twelve administered baptism to others, very 
soon after they became disciples of Jesus. 3 But 
while there can be, I think, no reasonable doubt 
that all the twelve apostles had been baptized by 
John, yet we have no occasion now to insist upon 
this ; nor need our present inquiry be embar- 
rassed by any doubts as to the question whether 
the baptism of John was essentially Christian 
baptism. It is plain that the first administrator 
of baptism must have been unbaptized. It mat- 
ters little who the first administrator of Ghristian 
baptism was, — whether John the Baptist, or 
one of the twelve apostles, — provided only that 
he had a divine commission to perform it, and to 
prescribe the qualifications of those who should 
receive it. Such a divine commission the apos- 

l Jno. i. 85-42. 2 I 6a i. xl. 3. 3 J D o. iii. 22; iv. 12. 



18 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

ties certainly had from Christ himself, in regard 
to both Baptism and the Lord's Supper; and 
this commission supersedes the necessity, though 
it does not exclude the fitness, of any other 
qualification. 

In proof of the position, that no unbaptized 
person is duly qualified to be a communicant at 
the Lord's table, we appeal to the examples of 
Scripture, and to the nature and import of the 
two ordinances, as therein described. 



THE EXAMPLES OF SCRIPTURE. 

The Lord's Supper is much less frequently 
mentioned and referred to in the Scriptures than 
Baptism is; but wherever it is mentioned or 
referred to, it is in a way which accords with the 
view that it is a duty and a privilege belonging 
to those who have previously been baptized. 
There is no instance, after its first institution, of 
any persons partaking of it, concerning whom 
we have not good reason to believe that they 
had been first baptized. There is nothing to 
favor the view that it ought to be, or properly 
may be, under any circumstances, observed by 



BAPTISM. 19 

those who have not been baptized. Those of 
whom it is recorded, that "they continued 
steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellow- 
ship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers ," 
had just before been baptized. 1 

Those Corinthian disciples, to whom the apos- 
tle gave directions in regard to the Lord's Sup- 
per, were baptized disciples. While he rejoiced, 
for a particular reason which he is careful to 
specify, that he had baptized but few among 
them, yet he speaks of them all as baptized. 
"Were ye baptized in the name of Paul ? " 2 

And when it is said of the disciples at Troas, 3 
that they came together to break bread, we are 
justified in assuming that they had been pre- 
viously baptized, in view of the plain doctrine and 
uniform precedents of Scripture, by w^hich the 
proper place of baptism is fixed at the beginning 
of the Christian life, as the primal act of submis- 
sion to Christ's authority, and the formal decla- 
ration of faith in him. 

This statement introduces our second medium 
of proof, namely : — 

1 Acts ii. 41, 42. 2 1 Cor. i. 13. 

3 The word " disciples," in Acts xx. 7, is indeed omitted by the best editors of 
the Greek Testament ; but it is implied in the word " them." 



20 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 



THE NATURE AND IMPORT OF THE TWO 
ORDINANCES. 

The character and meaning of each of these 
symbolical rites, and the relation between them, 
as exhibited in the Scriptures, require that Bap- 
tism should always precede the reception of the 
Lord's Supper. 

The commission which Jesus gave to the 
apostles to baptize plainly intimates that bap- 
tism was the rite by which those who became 
his disciples were to declare themselves such, and 
to unite themselves to the company of believers, 
to be instructed in all subsequent Christian 
duties. " Go ye, therefore, and disciple all na- 
tions, baptizing them in the name of the Father, 
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching 
them to observe all things whatsoever I have 
commanded you." x " Go ye into all the world, 
and preach the gospel to every creature. He 
that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved. 2 
From the very terms of this commission, from 
the place which baptism here occupies, and the 
distinction which it defines, it appears evident 

1 Matt, xrviii. 19, 20. 2 Markxvi.15, lti. 



BAPTISM. 21 

that this rite stands appropriately at the begin- 
ning of the Christian life (not at the beginning 
of the natural life, but at the beginning: of the 
Christian life), as the introduction to a course of 
obedience to whatever else Christ has com- 
manded. 

The examples of baptism recorded in the 
book of Acts all agree with this view. On the 
day of Pentecost, they that gladly received the 
word preached by Peter were immediately bap- 
tized. 1 So it was with those in Samaria who 
believed what Philip preached. 2 So it was with 
the Ethiopian eunuch:" So it was with Paul, 
when he received the word with joy at the 
mouth of Ananias. 4 So it was with Cornelius 
the centurion and his friends, when they believed 
those things which Peter preached, and had 
received the Holy Spirit. 5 So it was with Lydia, 
when her heart was opened to attend to the 
things which Paul spake ; G and with the jailer m 
the same city, whose heart w^as opened in a man- 
ner so different. 7 So it was with Crispus and his 
family, and many other Corinthians with them. 8 

l Acts ii. 38, 41. 2 viii. 12. 3 viii. 35, 38. 4 ix. 17, 18 ; xxii. 16. 

S x. 47, 48. e xvi. 14, 15. 7 vs. 29-38. 8 xviii. 8. 



22 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION". 

So it was universally. Baptism always followed 
immediately, as the first duty after the exercise 
of saving faith. There is a plain concurrence of 
all scriptural precedents in this matter. In no 
case is it said, " then they that gladly received 
the word came together to break bread ; " or, 
"who can forbid bread and wine, that these 
should not eat the Lord's Supper, who have 
received the Holy Ghost as well as we ? " or, 
" believing in God with all his house, he sat down 
at the table of the Lord, he and all his straight- 
way;" or, "repent, and receive the Lord's 
Supper, every one of you ; " or, " when they 
believed the preaching concerning the kingdom 
of God, they broke bread, both men and women." 
In no case are they described as receiving the 
Lord's Supper immediately after their conversion, 
or as receiving the Lord's Supper first, and bap- 
tism afterwards. Can this be accidental? or is 
it significant of the Lord's will ? There is one 
order uniformly intimated and observed in Scrip- 
ture : there is no intimation that we are at liberty 
to change it ; there is no intimation that it is a 
matter of indifference. We have no right to 



BAPTISM. 23 

change that order; we have no warrant for 
regarding it as indifferent. 

The manner in which baptism is referred to 
in the Epistles confirms the view that it should 
always precede the reception of the Lord's Sup- 
per. In Rom. vi. 3-6, it is represented as a 
symbol of dying to sin, and rising to a new and 
holy life. The same representation is found 
more briefly exhibited in Colossians ii. 12. In 
Gal. iii. 26, 27, baptism is represented as the put- 
ting on of Christ, and as intimately connected 
with that saving faith in him by which we 
become children of God. 

The passages in which baptism is closely 
coupled with regeneration and salvation may be 
pertinently referred to here. They are, John iii. 
21 ; Acts xxii. 16 ; Titus iii. 5 ; and 1 Peter iii. 
21. These passages, which have proved very 
troublesome to the commentators, are easily ex- 
plained when baptism is regarded as occupying 
its legitimate and scriptural position, as the 
closely following declaration, and appointed sign 
of manifestation to men, of that inward spiritual 
change which is indispensable to salvation. 

In all the above Scriptures, the position of 



24 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

baptism is such, that there is no room, so to 
speak, for the communion of the Lord's Supper 
to precede it. 

The difference between Baptism, as a rite to be 
administered once for all, and the Lord's Supper, 
as an observance to be often repeated, is more- 
over an expressive intimation of the proper rela- 
tive position of the two. That Baptism should 
be placed last, after the Lord's Supper has been 
received many times during a course of years, 
would be manifestly at variance with all that the 
Scriptures say of its nature and meaning, no less 
than with all scriptural precedents. That it 
should have its place somewhere, anywhere, in 
the midst of oft-repeated communions, would be 
still more incongruous in itself, and equally con- 
trary to all the examples of the New Testament. 

We prove that Baptism should precede the 
Lord's Supper, then, by the same uniform agree- 
ment of Scripture precedents by which we prove 
that repentance, faith, and regeneration, should 
precede baptism. 



BAPTISM. 25 



PEDOBAPTIST TESTIMONIES. 

In regard to this point, the agreement is very 
general among all denominations of Christians. 
Even those who do not admit that repentance 
and faith should always precede baptism, main- 
tain that baptism should always precede the com- 
munion. I cite a few emphatic testimonials on 
this point. — Baxter says : "What man dare go in 
a way which hath neither precept nor example to 
warrant it, from a way that hath a full current of 
both ? Yet they that will admit members into 
the visible church without baptism do so." * 

Dr. Wall says : "No church ever gave the com- 
munion to any persons before they were baptized. 
Among all the absurdities that ever were held, 
none ever maintained that, that any person 
should partake of the communion before he was 
baptized." 2 

Dr. Doddridge confirms this testimony : " It is 
certain that as far as our knowledge of antiquity 
reaches, no unbaptized person received the Lord's 
Supper. How excellent soever any man's charac- 

1 Plain Scripture Proof of Infant Baptism, in reply to Mr. Tombes, page 24. 

2 Hist, of Inf. Bap., Part ii. ch. ix. 



26 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION". 

ter is, he must be baptized before he can be 
looked upon as completely a member of the 
church of Christ." * 

So says Dr. Dwight: "It is an indispensable 
qualification for this ordinance, that the candi- 
date for communion be a member of the visible 
church of Christ in full standing. By this I in- 
tend that he should be a person of piety ; that 
he should have made a public profession of re- 
ligion ; and that he should have been baptized." 2 

Dr. Griffin says : " We ought not to commune 
with those who are not baptized, and of course 
are not church members, even if we regard them 
as Christians. There is such a relationship estab- 
lished between the two ordinances, that I have 
no right to separate them ; in other words, I have 
no right to send the sacred elements out of the 
church." 3 

Dr. Hibbard, a recognized authority among 
Methodists, says : " Both Baptist and Pedobaptist 
churches agree in rejecting from communion at 
the table of the Lord, and in denying the right 
of church fellowship, to all who have not been 



1 Lectures, pp. 511, 512. 2 Serm. 160, vol. iv. pp. SG5-6. 

3 Letter on Communion, published in 1829. 



BAPTISM. 27 

baptized. Valid baptism they consider essential 
to visible church membership. This also we 
hold." * 

In fact, there is hardly any point on which 
there has been a more unanimous agreement of 
all churches, ancient and modern, than on the 
one now under consideration. We might quote 
from Justin Martyr, from the Apostolical Consti- 
tutions, and from a long line of ancient witnesses. 
But as the emphatic statements of Dr. Wall and 
Dr. Doddridge have never, so far as we know, 
been challenged, it is unnecessary to confirm 
them. 

Yet individuals have arisen, at different times 
and in different sects, who have denied the neces- 
sity of baptism as a prerequisite to the commu- 
nion. Among these, there is none abler or more 
widely known than the eloquent English Baptist, 
Robert Hall. 



ROBERT HALL'S VIEW. 

It is fair to state his views in his own language. 
" There is no position in the whole compass of 

1 Ilihbardon Baptism, p. ]"4. 



25 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUXIOX. 

theology," he says, in the Preface to his work on 
the " Terms of Communion," " of the truth of 
which I feel a stronger persuasion, than that no 
man, or set of men, are entitled to prescribe, as 
an indispensable condition of communion, what 
the New Testament has not enjoined as a condi- 
tion of salvation. To establish this position is 
the principal object of the following work ; and 
though it is more immediately occupied in the 
discussion of a case which respects the Baptists 
and Pedobaptists, that case is attempted to be 
decided entirely upon the principle now main- 
tained, and is no more than the application of it 
to a particular instance." l In another place, he 
states it as his " leading position, that no church 
has a right to establish terms of communion which 
are not terms of salvation" 2 Again he says, com- 
munion with Pedobaptists " neither implies that 
they are baptized, nor the contrary ; it has no 
retrospective view to that ordinance whatever ; it 
implies neither more nor less than that they are 
members of Christ, and the objects, consequently, 
of that fraternal attachment which our opj^onents 
themselves profess to feel." 3 " We cheerfully re- 

1 Works, vol. i. p. 285, Gregory's edition. 2 Ibid. p. 359, 3 p. 854. 



BAPTISM. 29 

ceive pious Pedobaptists, not from the supposition 
that the ceremony which they underwent in their 
infancy possesses the smallest validity, but as sin- 
cere followers of Christ : and for my own part, I 
should feel as little hesitation in admitting: such 
as deny the perpetuity of baptism, whenever the 
evidence of their piety is equally clear and deci- 
sive." l Once more, in his reply to Mr. Kinghorn, 
he says, "he justly observes, that the question, 
and the only question, is, whether those who are 
acknoicledged to be unbaptized ought to come to 
the Lord 's table? 2 

Nothing can be plainer, then, than that Mr. 
Hall's whole argument is founded on the princi- 
ple, that baptism, as not being an indispensable 
term of salvation, cannot properly be made an 
indispensable term of communion. 

OBJECTIONS TO HIS PRINCIPLE. 

In regard to this fundamental principle of Mr. 
Hall's argument, 

1. I remark, in the first place, that a principle 
so contrary to the creeds and the customs of all 

1 Works, vol. i. p. 405. 2 p. 401. 



30 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

churches, ancient and modern, needs to be demon- 
strated by very plain and sure evidence. A very 
heavy burden of proof rests on him who under- 
takes to establish a proposition so contrary to 
what has been universally received. 

2. A second objection to Mr. Hall's principle is, 
that it assumes a false and unscriptural inequality 
between the two Christian rites. It assumes that 
the Lord's Supper holds altogether a higher rank 
than Baptism ; that it is more intimately connect- 
ed with union and charity, cliscipleship and salva- 
tion ; that its omission is a much graver matter 
than the omission of baptism ; that it is compar- 
atively unessential whether all true disciples are 
baptized or not, but very essential that they 
should all partake of the communion, and that 
they should, as far as opportunity allows, all par- 
take of it together. Now we find no scriptural 
warrant for asserting or supposing any such infe- 
riority of the one rite to the other. Both derive 
their sacreclness and obligation from the same 
divine source ; both represent substantially the 
same great facts; both presuppose the same 
relation of the individual soul to Christ, the 
same spiritual qualifications in those who 



BAPTISM. 31 

receive them. He who said, "Do this in remem- 
brance of me," said also, "Go, teach all nations, 
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and 
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." If in the 
Lord's Supper we show forth symbolically the 
death of Christ on the cross, so are we in bap- 
tism baptized into his death, and symbolically 
buried w T ith him. If the Communion expresses 
our personal participation of Christ as the Bread 
of Life, so have we who have been baptized into 
Christ put on Christ. It is not strange that those 
who are accustomed to administer baptism to 
unconscious babes should regard it as less sacred 
and essential than the Communion. But neither 
the Scriptures, nor the principles and practices 
of Baptists, furnish any reason for attributing any 
more sacred character, or any more religious im- 
portance, to the Lord's Supper than to Baptism. 
Instead of saying, with Mr. Hall, that "no church 
has a right to establish terms of Communion 
which are not terms of salvation," it would be 
much nearer the truth of Scripture to say, that 
"no church has a right to establish terms of 
Baptism which are not terms of salvation." For 
it is Baptism, and not the Communion, which is 



32 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

most frequently and emphatically connected in 
the Scriptures with the things that accompany 
salvation. 

3. A third objection to Mr. Hall's principle is, 
that it tends to do away with baptism entirely. 
We do not believe that baptism is indispensable 
to admission into heaven ; but we do believe that 
it is the only proper door of entrance into the 
visible church, and therefore indispensable to 
qualify a person to partake of the Lord's Supper, 
as a privilege and duty in the church. But if it 
is not indispensable to this latter, if the highest 
privilege of church membership may be legiti- 
mately enjoyed by him who neglects it, then 
what is its importance ? Mr. Hall virtually ad- 
mits that his view tends to make it of small 
account, when he says he should have no hesita- 
tion in receiving to the Communion those who 
deny the perpetuity of baptism. 

4. Indeed, the tendency of this principle seems 
to me to be more destructive still, and to tend to 
do away with the visible church altogether. I 
name this, therefore, as a fourth objection to Mr. 
Hall's view. If nothing is essential to member- 
ship in the visible church but what is essential to 



BAPTISM. 33 

membership in the invisible, then any particular 
visible church can only be conceived of as a part 
of the church invisible, and as differing from it 
only as a part differs from the whole. Indeed, 
Mr. Hall distinctly takes just this ground. But 
when we attempt to carry out this theory of the 
visible church, we find that it is utterly impracti- 
cable. It is like attempting to conceive of a 
concrete abstraction. Nothing but a " poet's eye, 
in a fine frenzy rolling," can " glance from heaven 
to earth, from earth to heaven," with sufficient 
rapidity to catch this unsubstantial vision ; 
nothing but a poet's imagination can " body forth 
the form of" this "thing unknown;" and not 
even the "poet's pen" can "give" to this "airy 
nothing a local habitation." The visible church 
has all at once become invisible. To speak so- 
berly, no church ever did, or ever could, manage 
its affairs, or even exist as a church, on this theory. 
Such a church must not require the convert to be 
baptized, nor to partake of the Lord's Supper, 
nor to submit to its discipline ; for none of these 
are terms of salvation. It would certainly be 
impossible for any church, consistently with this 
theory, to exercise discipline, or even to know 
3 



34 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

who its own members were ; for as soon as any- 
visible act, ceremony, or form, is made essential 
to admission into it, or membership in it, then it 
violates the law of its being, by establishing terms 
of membership which are not terms of salvation. 
It is very true that a scripturally constituted 
church will aim to receive to its membership 
only such as are in its judgment already mem- 
bers of the invisible church, and heirs of salva- 
tion; but it belongs to the very nature of a visible 
church, to require, in addition to those spiritual 
qualifications which constitute membership in 
the invisible, some visible mark of membership ; 
and this must of course be something that is not 
indispensable to salvation. 

Mr. Hall says, " No church has a right to 
establish terms of communion which are not 
terms of salvation." We say that no church 
has a right to establish any terms of commun- 
ion, merely on its own authority ; but whatever 
terms the Lord has established, these every 
church is bound to abide by; with these no 
church has a right to dispense ; no church has 
any more right to make them broader and easier, 
than it has to make them narrower and stricter. 



BAPTISM. 35 

It seems to nie that, under the form in which 
Mr. Hall states his principle, there lurks a 
treacherous proof of its unsoundness. 

But, sound or unsound, such is incontestably 
and avowedly his principle. The basis, as he 
explicitly declares, of his whole argument is, 
that no church has a right to require baptism 
as an indispensable prerequisite to the com- 
munion; for certainly Mr. Hall did not regard 
baptism as indispensable to salvation. If that 
foundation is taken away, the whole fabric of 
his argument falls to the ground. Hence, those 
who do not agree with him in that "leading 
position" are not entitled to avail themselves 
of any of his arguments against strict com- 
munion. They cannot do so consistently, unless 
they are able to show that he did not well 
understand his own reasoning, and that he was 
mistaken when he affirmed that it rested entirely 
upon that axiom. Yet, in spite of this obvious 
reflection, we all know how common it is for 
both Baptists and Pedobaptists to avail them- 
selves freely of his arguments, his expressions, 
and his authority on this controverted subject, 
while they do not, either in practice or in theory, 



36 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

admit the soundness of the foundation on which 
his whole argument is built. If now, after all, 
any should say that the evidence on this point 
does not appear to them to be such as to compel 
conviction, — that they are not quite sure that 
baptism ought always to precede the participation 
of the Lord's Supper, we answer, that they ought 
to be quite sure of the contrary before they 
invite to the communion those whom they do 
not regard as baptized. 



III. 

CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 

Intimately connected with both the foregoing, 
yet not quite identical with either, is that which 
we consider as a third prerequisite in every can- 
didate for communion at the Lord's table, 
namely, church membership. 

Ordinarily, and regularly, this is implied in 
baptism. This rite is appropriately the door of 
entrance into the visible church ; and though it 
may be, and ought to be, administered in some 
cases where there is yet no visible church in 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 37 

existence, yet, where such a church does exist, 
baptism is the only regular and scriptural door 
of entrance into it. And as baptism comes 
properly at the beginning of the Christian life, 
and introduces the disciple into the church, it 
follows that the communion of the Lord's Sup- 
per is for those who are in the church. This 
view is generally admitted even by those who 
practise infant baptism, in spite of the incon- 
venient consequences which, on their princi- 
ples, manifestly result from it. We have seen, 
in the testimonies quoted under the former 
division, how inseparably visible church mem- 
bership connected itself with baptism, in the 
thoughts and expressions of those w^ho were 
treating of the latter subject. It was impos- 
sible to cite their testimony in regard to bap- 
tism as prerequisite to the communion, with- 
out citing at the same time a similar testimony 
in regard to church membership. According to 
these concurrent testimonies, any person who 
is not a member of any visible church is by 
that fact disqualified, or, more properly speak- 
ing, unqualified to receive the Lord's Supper. 
We have only to inquire, therefore, whether 



38 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

they are correct in this view. Is the Lord's 
Supper represented in the Scriptures as a church 
privilege, for the right observance of which 
the church, as such, is responsible to Christ? 
If he designed it to be celebrated in the church, 
and by the church, then, of course, on scriptural 
principles, it belongs only to the members of 
the church to participate in it. 

If we recur to the original institution of this 
rite, we find that the first observance of it was 
confined to the immediate companions of Jesus, 
to those whom he had, nearly three years before, 
chosen to be with him, 1 who were united as one 
company of worshippers, under his instruction 
and guidance. There were doubtless many 
other disciples of Christ in Jerusalem at the 
time ; but none except the twelve were so united 
into one community as to be a fit representation 
of a church. While, then, the twelve apostles, 
as commissioned by Christ to preach and bap- 
tize, represent the gospel ministry, as a perpetual 
succession of officers in the church, they may 
also, as a company of fellow-worshippers, as 
a visible community of the disciples of Christ, 

1 Markiii.lt. 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 39 

no less fitly be regarded as representing a church. 
It certainly was not in the former of these 
two characters that they alone received the con- 
secrated symbols of Christ's broken body and 
shed blood ; that would be to suppose that only 
the ministers of Christ have a right to partake 
of these emblems. It must have been rather 
in the latter character, as representing a visible 
church, that they alone were allowed to par- 
take of the bread and the wine. 

This view is in harmony with all the subsequent 
scriptural notices of the ordinance in question. 
It is always represented as a social observance, to 
be celebrated by the church collectively. 

When we read of the baptism of single indi- 
viduals, as of Paul and the Ethiopian eunuch, 
there is never any intimation that the adminis- 
tration of the Lord's Supper followed. Even 
when whole households are baptized, as in the 
case of Lydia, the Philippian jailer, and Crispus 
at Corinth, the same silence is observed. But 
when great numbers were baptized, as on the 
day of Pentecost, we find them soon after join- 
ing in the celebration of the Lord's Supper. And 
observe how these communicants are character- 



40 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

ized : they are those who " continued steadfastly 
in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in 
breaking of bread, and in prayers" The con- 
comitants of the participation of the Lord's Sup- 
per, as here specified, are just the marks by which 
a church is characterized. These communicants 
have just been baptized: they form a community 
or fellowship, receiving together the instructions 
of their apostolic pastors, and worshipping to- 
gether in prayer. A community of baptized 
believers, under common instruction, and united 
in worship, — what is it but a church of Christ ? 
Indeed, it is expressly called by this name, only 
a few verses further on. " And the Lord added 
to the church daily such as should be saved." 
And after this record of their breaking bread 
together, they are habitually spoken of as " the 
church," " the church at Jerusalem." * 

In the twentieth chapter of Acts we have 
an account of the administration of the Lord's 
Supper by the apostle Paul to the disciples at 
Troas. They came together upon the first day 
of the week to break bread. 2 Paul preached 
a sermon to them, and then broke bread to them. 3 

1 Acts v. 11 ; Viii. 1 ; xi. 22 ; *v. 4, 2 Verse 7. 3 v. 11. 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 41 

The ordinance is here represented as a stated 
observance of the company of disciples at Troas, 
a part of that public worship of God for the 
maintenance of which the church was constituted, 
and is responsible. It has been questioned, 
I know, whether there was at this time any 
church at Troas. 1 But I do not see how there 
can be any reasonable doubt on that point. This 
was Paul's third visit to that important city. 
Both his former visits, indeed, were shorter than 
he intended, — his departure being hastened, in 
the first instance, by the vision that called him 
over into Macedonia, 2 and in the second by his 
impatient desire to meet his brother Titus. 3 But 
he tells us, in reference to this second visit, that 
when he went there " to preach Christ's gospel," 
" a door was opened unto him by the Lord." Is 
it probable, then, that nearly a year later, after he 
had fully preached the gospel through Macedonia, 

1 A writer in the Christian Review for April, 1853, in an article on Weekly 
Communion, attempts to establish the conclusion that there was no church at 
Troas at this time. But his argument docs not seem to me conclusive. It ia 
founded mainly on the omission of any definite mention of the church at Troas ; 
but the supposition which the author makes to explain the reason for celebrating 
the Lord's Supper is quite as destitute of positive support as that of the existence 
of a church there, and, as it seems to me, far less probable in itself. 

2 Acts xvi. 8-11. 3 2 Cor. ii. 12, 13. 



42 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

and round about unto Illyricum, and had re- 
mained three months in Greece, there was still no 
church founded in Troas when he came there the 
third time? — especially as this was the place of 
rendezvous selected by him and those Macedo- 
nian brethren who had gone on before him. We 
feel justified in assuming that there was a church 
at Troas before this third visit of Paul, when he 
broke bread to them. 1 

The manner in which Paul speaks of the Lord's 
Supper in his first epistle to the Corinthians, con- 
firms the view that it is to be celebrated in the 
church, and as a church ordinance. In the 
eleventh chapter he uses such expressions as 
these: "When ye come together in church;" 2 
"when ye come together into one place;" 3 
"to eat the Lord's Supper;" 4 and their com- 
ing together in the church to eat this sacred 



1 Compare Acts xx. 2-5 with Rom. xv. 12. See also Conybeare and Howson's 
Life and Epistles of St. Paul, vol. i. pp. 281-285, vol. ii. pp. 90-92 and p. 206. The 
opinion expressed in this work is that Paul, on his second visit, remained there 
several weeks (ii. 91), and laid the foundation of a church, which rapidly- 
increased (pp. 91, 92). 

2 Verse 18. The omission of the article in the original is significant. It makes 
the language equivalent to our phrase, " As a church," or, if the critics will par- 
don the expression, " In a church capacity." 

3 v. 20. 4 v. 33. 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 43 

feast is distinctly contrasted with their more 
private eating at home. 1 The tenor of the 
whole passage is in perfect harmony with 
the inscription at the beginning of the epistle, 
in which it is addressed, not to individual Chris- 
tians, as such, but " to the church of God which is 
at Corinth." 2 



THE LORD'S SUPPER A SYMBOL OF CHURCH 
FELLOWSHIP. 



In the tenth chapter, the apostle seems to go 
still further, and to intimate that this ordinance 
is a symbol of church fellovjship between those 
who partake of it together : " for we, being many, 
are one bread, and one body ; for we are all par- 
takers of that one bread." 3 A more literal 
rendering of his language, not requiring any 
such supplementary words (being, and) as our 
translators have inserted in italics, would be, 
" because there is one loaf, we, the many, are one 
body ; for we all partake of the one loaf." Here 
we understand the Lord's Supper to be repre- 
sented as an expressive symbol of church fellow- 

1 vs. 22,34. i v. 2. 3 v. 17. 



44 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

ship, and consequently not to be properly shared 
except by those who are actually united in church 
relations, or, at most, by those between whom no 
obstacle to union in such relations exists. 

Such is unquestionably the view which, as a 
matter of fact, men in general entertain of the 
communion. They look upon it as one of the 
chief and readiest marks of distinction between 
those who are within the church and those who 
are without. From seeing who approach the 
Lord's table, and who refrain, they infer at once 
who are walking in fellowship with the church, 
and who are not. 

And, in fact, what else is implied in excommu- 
nication as an act of church discipline ? If the 
joint participation of the Lord's Supper is not a 
symbol of church fellowship, then the exclusion 
of any person from that participation is not an 
expression of disfellowship. Neither does the 
withdrawal of church fellowship, on this suppo- 
sition, necessarily imply an exclusion from this 
participation : and therefore an excluded member 
might, without impropriety, continue to come to 
the Lord's table as before. Why should he not, if 
his coming imports nothing more than his personal 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 45 

commemoration of the death of Christ ? Thus 
that exclusion from the participation of the Lord's 
Supper, which is understood, by universal con- 
sent, to be involved in the highest act of church 
discipline, is a virtual admission that communion 
in this ordinance, whatever else it may import or 
imply, is also a sign of church fellowship, — of 
that distinct and peculiar agreement and union of 
views and feelings, which is, or should be, the 
determining consideration in fixing the denomi- 
national and ecclesiastical position of each be- 
liever in Christ. If, when we are bidden to 
withdraw ourselves from every brother that 
walketh disorderly, this withdrawal includes a 
separation from him in the rite which commemo- 
rates the death of Christ, then union in that rite 
must be at least one of the symbols by which 
church fellowship is expressed. Can any other 
act be named which expresses that fellowship so 
distinctly and so fully ? 

We conclude, in view of all the above consid- 
erations, that membership in a Christian church is 
a scriptural term of admission to the Lord's Sup- 
per ; and that those only can suitably unite in this 



46 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

observance between whom church relations do 
actually, or may properly, exist. 

This connection between church membership 
and the right to the Lord's Supper is in effect 
denied by those who maintain that this rite, apart 
from its commemorative character, is symbolical 
simply and solely of the fellowship between the 
soul of each communicant and Christ, and not 
at all of mutual and church fellowship between 
the communicants. This view takes off from the 
church at once all responsibility in regard to the 
character of those who come to the Lord's table. 
It makes each individual the sole judge of his 
qualification for the enjoyment of this privilege 
within the church. It makes exclusion from the 
Communion, instead of being a legitimate and 
severe penalty resulting from the highest act of 
church discipline, to be at the same time a theo- 
retical usurpation and a practical nullity. 



OBJECTION ANSWERED. 

But it is objected to the view which makes 
the participation of the Lord's Supper a symbol 
of mutual fellowship between the communicants, 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 47 

that it tends to foster an admitted evil in our 
churches, namely, the practice of staying away 
from the Communion on account of personal dif- 
ferences with other communicants, or want of 
confidence in their Christian character, or, at 
least, want of Christian fellowship with them for 
the time being. It is certainly desirable to find 
a remedy for this evil. But we do not think that 
remedy ought to be sought in the denial that the 
Lord's Supper is symbolical of mutual and church 
fellowship between those who partake of it ; be- 
cause we think that would be a denial of the 
truth. There is, indeed, no definite allusion to 
this import of the rite in the words of our Lord 
at its original institution. But we think the pas- 
sage cited from the First Epistle to the Corin- 
thians 1 does attribute to it such an import, 
and that in fact it results from the indissoluble 
connection between fellowship with Christ and 
fellowship with one another, that the rite which 
primarily expresses the first should also include 
the expression of the second. This connection is 
plainly set forth in the first chapter of the First 
Epistle of John. " That which we have seen and 

1 x. 17. 



48 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have 
fellowship with us ; and truly our fellowship is 
with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ." x 
" If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, 
we have fellowship one with another." 2 We 
think, therefore, that there is scriptural reason 
for that almost universal view which is taken 
of this ordinance, as expressive of the mutual 
confidence and affection of those that participate 
in it. And if this be so, the remedy for the evil, 
which we all admit and lament, must be sought 
for in some other way than in the denial of this 
secondary import of the Lord's Supper. Nor 
will it be difficult, I think, to show the impro- 
priety of absenting one's self from the Communion 
for such a cause, on grounds perfectly consistent 
with the doctrine here maintained. While the 
church as a body see no reason for withdrawing 
their fellowship from the person objected to, it 
does not belong to the individual objector to 
overrule the collective judgment of the whole. 
If the objectors feelings towards the person ob- 
jected to are such as unfit him to come to the 
Lord's table, the sooner he is rid of them the 
better. 

1 v.8. 2 v. 7. 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 49 

Besides, it well deserves to be considered, 
whether the proposed way of remedying the 
evil in question, even if it were lawful to have 
recourse to it, would not be worse than the evil 
which it seeks to cure. Would it not be likely 
to result in making churches altogether too pa- 
tient of differences and alienations, and altogether 
too indifferent to the harmony and love that 
should subsist among their members ? 



SUPPOSED PRIMITIVE LAXITY. 

The necessity of church membership as a qual- 
ification for the Communion is sometimes ques- 
tioned on such grounds as the following : Chris- 
tianity is pre-eminently spiritual in its nature, and 
personal in its application ; the spirit of the New 
Testament is opposed to all formalism, — it is a 
spirit of freedom ; and the apostles and primitive 
Christians seem to have laid little stress on out- 
ward ordinances and ecclesiastical organization. 
In obedience to this spirit, when the disciples of 
Christ came together, they probably united in 
celebrating the Lord's Supper, without any for- 
4 



50 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION*. 

mal investigation or inquiry as to each one's 
baptism or church membership. We must not 
transfer our present views to primitive times, and 
attribute to the apostolical churches all that reg- 
ularity and routine with which we are familiar. 

In opposition to this view of the laxity of the 
primitive Christians in regard to external rites 
and church organization, there are several impor- 
tant considerations to be urged. 

Supposing, in the first place, that this is the 
true view of the teachings of the New Testa- 
ment, and of the spirit of the primitive disciples, 
the inquiry naturally arises, Why is not the same 
principle applicable to both ordinances? Why 
were they not just as lax in regard to the observ- 
ance of the Lord's Supper as in regard to baptism 
and church membership? Baptism is no more 
an outward rite than the Lord's Supper. Cer- 
tainly, the Scripture insists more upon the impor- 
tance of the former rite than of the latter, and 
connects it more intimately with the things that 
accompany salvation. 

But is the tenor of the New Testament teach- 
ing such as the above objectors represent? That 
such is, very extensively, the spirit of the present 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 51 

age, is sufficiently apparent ; but whether or not 
it is the spirit of apostolical Christianity, is a 
matter to be determined by no hasty inference 
from the spiritual and personal character of the 
religion of Christ, but by a careful examination 
of the Scriptures. It is readily granted that they 
are not very full in their testimony, nor minute 
and circumstantial in their details, in regard to 
matters pertaining to church order. But we 
must remember how brief and elliptical their 
historical records are, and not require on this 
subject a kind and degree of evidence incompat- 
ible with the nature and limits of the inspired 
volume. We must carefully survey the entire 
tenor of the teachings of the New Testament, 
and remembering that many things must be sup- 
posed which are not recorded, we must observe 
what is the general bearing of its testimony on 
the question before us. Confessedly we have but 
indications to guide us, rather than specific rules. 
Which way do the indexes point, — towards lax- 
ity, or towards strictness ? 



52 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 



PROMINENCE OF THE CHURCH RELATION IN THE 
NEW TESTAMENT. 

In answer to this inquiry, something may be 
learned from the different manner in which the 
followers of Christ are most frequently desig- 
nated in different parts of the New Testament. 
The names chiefly used to designate them in 
their individual character and relation to their 
Lord are " disciples " and " saints " ; in their per- 
sonal relation one to another they are called 
"brethren"; and in their associated and organ- 
ized relation they are spoken of as " churches." 
The word " disciples " is applied to them about 
two hundred and thirty times in the Gospels, 
about thirty times in the Acts, and not once in 
the Epistles. The word " saints " is used to des- 
ignate them not more than once, if at all, in the 
Gospels, 1 only four or five times in the Acts, and 
about fifty-five times in the Epistles. The word 
" brethren," expressive of the mutual relation of 
Christians, and at the same time suggestive of 
their union into a society or brotherhood, is found 

l Matt, xxvii. 52, where it is more naturally referred to the saints of the Old 
Testament. 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 53 

in this application about fifteen times in the Gos- 
pels, about thirty times in the Acts, and more 
than one hundred times in the Epistles. It is 
used in the latter nearly twice as often as the 
word " saints." But how is it with the word 
" churches " ? We should not, of course, expect 
to find this word common in the Gospels ; and 
in fact we do not meet with it at all except in 
Matthew, where it is used three times. 1 In the 
Acts it occurs about twenty times, and in the 
Epistles about ninety times. It appears from 
this comparison that, in the later writings of the 
New Testament, the followers of Christ are 
spoken of collectively as churches nearly as 
often as they are designated as brethren, and 
much oftener than they are called by any other 
name, expressive merely of their individual char- 
acter. This seems to me to show a marked 
prominence given in the apostolic writings to 
the ecclesiastical organization of the disciples of 
Christ. 

Of the fourteen Epistles of Paul, four are ad- 
dressed to individuals, and not to a company of 
disciples ; 2 one is without any inscription ; 3 and 

1 xvi. 18; xvili. 17, twice. 2 l and 2 Tim., Titus, Philemon. 3 Hebrews. 



54 PEEEEQtTISITES TO COMMUNION. 

of the remaining nine, five are inscribed expressly 
to churches, 1 the other four to the saints in the 
places to which they were sent. 2 

In the Apocalypse, John addresses himself to 
the churches in his introduction ; 3 and the Lord 
addresses his seven messages of counsel, reproof, 
and encouragement, to the churches of Asia. It 
is the message of his Spirit to the churches, which 
all who have ears are admonished to regard. 4 
And the churches, with their pastors, are dis- 
tinctly individualized, and distinguished from 
each other, under the emblems of the candle- 
sticks and the stars. 

In many cases, in Acts and in the Epistles, 
the churches are explicitly mentioned, where we 
should more naturally expect some term descrip- 
tive of individuals. It was to the church that 
the Lord added daily such as should be saved. 5 
It is against the church that a great persecution 
arises. 6 It is the churches that have rest when 
the persecution is over. 7 It is with the church 
that Paul and Barnabas assemble themselves a 
whole year at Antioch, where the disciples were 

1 1 and 2 Cor., Gal., 1 and 2 Thess. 2 Rom., Ephes., Phil., Coloss. 3 i. 4. 
4 ii. 7, 11, 17, 29 ; iii. G, 13, 22. 5 Acts ii. 47. 6 viii. 1. 7 Ls. 31. 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 55 

first called Christians. 1 It is by the church that 
these two and their companions are brought on 
their way when they go up from Antioch to Je- 
rusalem, to consult the apostles and elders about 
circumcision. 2 It is the church that receives 
them, with the apostles and elders, when they 
arrive there. 3 And it is the whole church that 
unite with the apostles and elders in sending the 
decision back to Antioch and the neighboring 
regions. And when Paul goes with Silas to 
revisit the scenes of his former labors, his errand 
is. to confirm the churches. 4 These are but a few 
specimens out of many in which prominence is 
given to the name which expresses the ecclesias- 
tical organization of the primitive disciples. 



THE WORD "CHURCH" NOT USED LOOSELY. 



And there are many indications that this word 
"church" was not used loosely to denote the 
aggregate of believers in any particular place, 
but that it expresses a definite and pervading 
organization. Paul and Barnabas were set apart 

1 3d. 2G. 2 xv. 3. 3 xv. 4. 4 xv. 41. 



56 PKEKEQUISITES TO • COMMUNION. 

to their missionary work by the church at Anti- 
och; 1 in the prosecution of their work they 
ordained elders in every church ; 2 and when they 
returned to Antioch they assembled the church 
to hear the report of their labors. 3 When Paul 
had not time to visit Ephesus, as he wished, he 
sent for the elders of that church to meet him at 
Miletus. 4 

We have seen above that the elders of the 
church at Jerusalem are repeatedly spoken of. 
The same officers are mentioned under the same 
name, or under that of bishops, by Paul, in his 
Epistles to the Philippians, 5 to Timothy, 6 and to 
Titus, 7 and also by James 8 and by Peter. 9 The 
scattered notices of the pecuniary contributions 
among the early Christians are such as imply a 
distinct church organization, and definite church 
action on this particular subject. The apostle 
gives a specific direction to the church at Cor- 
inth, in regard to the manner of making collec- 
tions ; and he tells them that he had given the 
same order to the churches of Galatia. 10 Again 
he writes to them, in regard to his refusal to 



1 Acts xiii. 1-3. 


2 xiv. 23. 


^ xiv. 27. 


4 xx. 17, 


6 i. 10. 


6 1 Ep. iii. 1,2; v. 17. 


7 i. 5, 7. 


8 v. 14. 




o 1 Pet. v. i. 


10 1 Cor. xvi. 1. 





CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 57 

receive from them any compensation for his 
labors, " I robbed other churches, taking wages 
of them to do you service." * He speaks also of 
messengers chosen by the churches to convey 
their contributions to their destined objects. 2 He 
writes to the Philippians that, during a certain 
period of his ministry, no church communicated 
with him, as concerning giving and receiving, but 
they only. 3 We read, moreover, of letters of 
commendation, 4 and of a register of those wid- 
ows who were supported by the church. 5 The 
immoral person in the church at Corinth was 
excluded by the vote of many, and afterwards 
restored. 6 



UNIFORMITY IN PRIMITIVE CHURCH USAGES. 

There are remarkable indications, too, of regu- 
larity and uniformity in matters of church action 
and discipline. We have seen an example of 
this in the matter of collections. The apostle 
Paul sends Timothy to Corinth to bring the 
disciples there into remembrance of his ways, 

1 2 Cor. xi. 8. 3 viii. 19-23. 3 iv. 15. 

4 2 Cor. iii. 1. 5 1 Tim. v. 9, 16. 6 l Cor. v. 12, 13 ; 2 Cor. ii. 6-8. 



58 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

which he says were uniform everywhere, — "as I 
teach everywhere, in every church." x After giv- 
ing them particular directions in regard to a 
certain subject, he adds, "and so ordain I in all 
churches." 2 Opposing himself to some that were 
contentious, he cuts the matter short by saying, 
" we have no such custom, neither the churches 
of God." 3 And again he reminds them that 
" God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, 
as in all churches of the saints." 4 All these indi- 
cations seem to denote that the organization of 
the disciples into churches was early, definite, 
complete, and uniform. 



STRICTNESS RATHER THAN LAXITY. 

We find, moreover, evidences of strictness, 
rather than laxity, both in matters of belief and 
of practice. The apostle praises the Corinthians 
for keeping the ordinances as he delivered them 
unto them. 5 He joys to behold the order of the 
church at Colosse. 6 He bids the Thessalonians 
" stand fast, and hold the traditions which they 
have been taught by him, whether by word or 

l 1 Cor. iv. 17. 2 vii. 17. 3 xi. 1G. 4 xiv. 33. 5 1 Cor. xi. 2. 6 ii. 5. 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 59 

by letter." l And he solemnly commands them 
to withdraw themselves from every brother that 
does not walk according to the order which he 
had enjoined upon them. 2 John writes to the 
elect lady not to receive into her house, nor bid 
Godspeed to, any that bring any other doctrine 
than that which he taught. 3 And our Lord him- 
self reproves the churches of Pergamos and Thy- 
atira, not because they had as churches swerved 
from the faith, but because they had allowed 
erroneous doctrines to be promulgated among 
them by the Nicolaitanes and by Jezebel. 4 

In all these things we discern no marks of lax- 
ity. Latitudinarianism must find its justification, 
if it can, elsewhere than in the teachings of the 
New Testament. The Broad Church must bring 
the stones for its foundation from other quarries 
than those of primitive Christianity. From the 
review which we have taken, we gather that 
there is quite as much danger of our erring by 
transferring the lax views of our times to the 
times of apostolical strictness, as there is of our 
attributing our modern notions of strictness to 

1 2 Thess. ii. 15. 2 iii. 6. 3 2 John 10, 11. 4 Kcv. ii. 14-16, 2a 



60 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

the more spontaneous and liberal proceedings* of 
the apostles. 

We think, then, to sum up the conclusion from 
the foregoing considerations, that the doctrine 
that the Lord's Supper is confided to the guar- 
dianship of the church, that it is to be observed 
in the church, and to be received only by the 
members of the church, and by such as, having 
all the qualifications of membership, may con- 
sistently be adopted as members, for the time ; — 
we think that this view of the Lord's Supper is 
indispensable to the maintenance of a scriptural 
discipline, and a scriptural distinction between 
them that are within the church and them that 
are without ; and that it is entirely in harmony 
with the letter and the spirit of that inspired 
word which gives such marked prominence to 
the associated relation of the disciples in church 
organization. 



CHURCH MEMBERSHIP. 61 



MEMBERSHIP IN" ONE CHURCH NOT MEMBERSHIP 
IN ALL CHURCHES. 

The position which we have just endeavored 
to establish is admitted in theory by all denomi- 
nations of Christians. I do not know that there 
is, or has ever been, any sect in Christendom who 
have maintained that there is no connection be- 
tween the Communion and church membership, 
— that it is just as proper for those who are 
without the visible church to come to the Lord's 
table as for those who are within. But some 
take the position, virtually, if not formally, that 
membership in any particular church entitles a 
person to the privilege of partaking of the Com- 
munion in all churches. This principle is in 
fact assumed by those members of Pedobaptist 
churches who complain that they are wronged in 
not being invited to partake of the Lord's Supper 
in Baptist churches. They are not members of 
our churches. The difference between their views 
and ours is such, that we could not consistently 
receive them as they are, if they wished to 
become members; nor could they consistently 
become members, if we were willing to receive 



62 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

them. We regard them as being in an error 
which we are not at liberty to co-operate in 
upholding and extending ; and they regard us in 
the same light. For them to claim the right to 
partake of the Lord's Supper in our churches, 
then, is certainly inconsistent with any established 
connection between church membership and 
the Communion, except in this form, that mem- 
bership in any one church entitles a person to 
this privilege in all churches. Such a principle 
is in our judgment incompatible alike with the 
independence and the responsibility of churches ; 
— with their independence, because it takes from 
them the right to judge of the qualifications of 
those whom they receive to their highest privi- 
leges; and with their responsibility, because it 
deprives them of the power to guard the table 
of the Lord against the aj>proach of the unworthy. 



AN ORDERLY WALK. 63 

IV. 

AN ORDERLY WALK. 

The fourth and last prerequisite which we 
name as a condition of admission to the Lord's 
Supper is, an orderly walk, or a course of life 
regulated by the precepts of the gospel. The 
injunction of the apostle Paul, in his Second 
Epistle to the Thessalonians, is very explicit and 
emphatic. " Now we command you, brethren, in 
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye with- 
draw yourselves from every brother that walketh 
disorderly, and not after the tradition which, he 
received of us." 1 This withdrawal must be either 
total or partial. If total, it involves the dissolu- 
tion of the tie of membership, and with this of 
course the cessation of the token of church fel- 
lowship in the joint participation of the sacred 
Supper. If partial and temporary, what other 
form can it take but the discontinuance for a sea- 
son of that ritual token ? The apostle himself 
admits, in another Epistle, the impracticability of 
withdrawing from all common social intercourse 

1UL6. 



64 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

with persons who are morally unfit to be associ- 
ated in the relation of church membership. " I 
wrote unto you in an epistle," he says, " not to 
company with fornicators : yet not altogether 
with the fornicators of this world, or with the 
covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters ; for 
then must ye needs go out of the world. But 
now I have written unto you not to keep com- 
pany, if any man that is called a brother be a 
fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, 
or a drunkard, or an extortioner ; with such a 
one, no, not to eatP 1 While it is impossible, then, 
without going out of the world, to avoid alto- 
gether the society of the immoral and the vicious, 
yet we are expressly forbidden to associate and 
eat with them as brethren. Our argument does 
not require us to interpret that expression, " to 
eat with such a one," as having specific reference 
to the Supper of the Lord. For if we may not 
eat a common meal with them, in our own houses, 
or in theirs, much less may we eat with them in 
the church, at the table of the Lord. The last 
would be a much more distinct recognition of 
them as brethren than the first. This passage 

1 1 Cor. v. 9-11. 



AN ORDERLY WALK. 65 

seems to furnish the key to the right interpreta- 
tion of all those places of Scripture in which we 
are directed to withdraw ourselves from certain 
classes of persons, not to keep company with 
them, to have no fellowship with them. 

The disorderly walking that disqualifies for 
admission to the Lord's Supper may be compre- 
hended under these four divisions : Immoral 
Conduct ; Disobedience to the Commands of 
Christ ; Heresy ; and Schism, or Factious 
Behavior. 



I. immoral conduct. 

By the rule given in the passage already quoted, 
we are required to withhold or withdraw this 
token of fellowship from those who are guilty of 
fornication, covetousness, idolatry, railing, drunk- 
enness, or extortion. These specifications are 
certainly not intended to be exhaustive, but to 
serves as examples, on the basis of which we may 
generalize. They justify the rule, that all im- 
moral conduct is a decisive disqualification for 
admission to the Lord's table. Nor is the above 
passage the only one which supports this position. 
5 



6G PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

In the same chapter, mention is made of a mem- 
ber of the church in Corinth who was guilty of 
incest. The apostle censures the Corinthian 
church for not having previously removed this 
offender from their number, 1 and he gives them a 
solemn charge to deliver such a one to Satan, 2 
and so to purge out from among them this leaven 
of wickedness. 3 The words of our Lord in the 
eighteenth chapter of Matthew's Gospel may also 
be appropriately cited here. A case is there sup- 
posed in which one brother has wronged another, 
and the course of proceeding for the aggrieved 
party is marked out with great particularity. As 
a final measure, after previous attempts to obtain 
redress have failed, the offender is to be reported 
to the church, and in case he refuses to hear 
them, he is to be to them as a heathen and a pub- 
lican, he is to be separated from their fellowship, 
and from the privileges which it bestows. 4 It is 
true that this was spoken before the disciples fully 
comprehended the nature and the ordinances of 
a visible church of Christ; and the conception 
which it then suggested to their minds may have 
corresponded more to the pattern of the Jewish 

1 1 Cor. v. 2. 2 vs. 4, 5. 3 v. 8. 4 vs. 15-18. 



AN ORDERLY WALK. 67 

synagogue than to that which they afterwards 
understood to be the fomi of his church. And 
yet he had told them before this, that he was to 
establish a church on earth against which the 
gates of hell should never prevail. 1 

I need not say, that our unwillingness to com- 
mune with Pedobaptists has no connection with 
the disqualification above mentioned. We fully 
admit, and heartily admire, the pure lives and 
eminent piety of many of those whom we are 
not accustomed to invite to partake with us in 
this sacred rite. We rejoice with all our hearts 
in the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ manifested 
in them, and in the work which he is doing in 
the world by their honored agency. 



II. DISOBEDIENCE TO THE COMMANDS OF CHRIST. 

Disobedience to the commands of Christ is a 
second form of disorderly walking which consti- 
tutes a disqualification for admission to the Lord's 
Supper. When the apostle gives that solemn 
charge to " the church of the Thessalonians," 2 to 
withdraw themselves "from every brother that 

1 Matt. xvi. IS. 2 2 Thess. i. 1. 



68 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

walketh disorderly," he adds, in explanation of 
the last expression, " and not after the tradition 
which he received of us." * In the context, there 
is a particular reference to persons who are idle 
and meddlesome. 2 In the same chapter, he says, 
" If any man obey not our word by this epistle, 
note that man, and have no company with him, 
that he may be ashamed." 3 In what sense they 
were to have no company with such, we have 
already seen explained by Paul himself in his 
letter to the Corinthians. The instructions of 
the apostle, to which he refers in these two pass- 
ages, were clothed with Christ's own authority, as 
he himself explicitly declares, — " The things that 
I write unto you are the commandments of the 
Lord." 4 !STot to walk after the tradition received 
from him, not to obey the word contained in his 
epistles, is the same, then, as disobedience to the 
commands of Christ, and as such involves the 
forfeiture of church fellowship and its privileged 
tokens. 

Pedobaptists disobedient to one Command. — 
Here is one ground on which we justify our sep- 
aration from Pedobaptists in the Communion of 

1 2 Thess. iii. 6. - vs. 7-12. 3 v. 14. 4 1 Cor. xiv. 37. 



AN ORDERLY WALK. 69 

the Lord's Supper. We are obliged to regard 
them as living in disobedience to one plain com- 
mand of Christ, — the command to be baptized. 
I do not say in wilful disobedience ; that would 
be inconsistent with the admissions already made : 
I do not say that the command is plain to them ; 
that would be to judge their conscience : but 
we do believe and maintain that the duty which 
they have neglected to perform is made plain in 
the word of God. We know that they enjoy 
manifest and manifold tokens of being loved 
and accepted of Christ ; but yet we do not think 
he is indifferent, or that he would have us indif- 
ferent, to their failure to obey him in this one 
particular. And while we see plain proof that 
this failure does not hinder many individuals 
among them from enjoying much larger measures 
of his Spirit than most of us enjoy, we think we 
see equally plain proof that their error in the 
matter of baptism is, in a general view, produc- 
tive of very mischievous consequences to the 
cause of truth and holiness, and that it is owing 
in no inconsiderable degree to the persevering 
protest which we, as a denomination, have always 
made against it, that its mischievous consequences 



70 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

are not much greater than they are. In this view 
we are very much confirmed, when we survey the 
moral and spiritual condition of those countries 
where the evils of involuntary membership in the 
church of Christ have not been counteracted or 
mitigated by the presence of any such antagonism 
as that which our protest exerts. 

III. HERESY. 

Heresy, or the holding and advocating of false 
doctrine, is a third form of disorderly walking, on 
account of which we are commanded to separate 
ourselves from those who are guilty of it. "I 
would," writes Paul to the Galatians, "they were 
even cut off which trouble you." * He does not 
give the same positive and solemn charge which 
he gave to the Corinthian church, perhaps be- 
cause he had still more reason than in that case 
to doubt whether, if put to the proof, they would 
be obedient in all things; 2 but he plainly ex- 
presses his will in the matter. The persons to 
whom he alludes, and whose excision he desires, 
are described in the first chapter, 3 and elsewhere 

l Gal. v. 12. 2 2 Cor. ii. 9. 3 Gal. i. 7. 






AN ORDERLY WALK. <1 

in the epistle, as perverters of the gospel of 
Christ. They were Judaizing teachers, who 
taught false doctrines, and caused divisions in 
the church. The same apostle also writes thus 
to Titus : " A man that is a heretic, after the first 
and second admonition, reject ." * The word " her- 
etic," which we now use to designate one who 
holds erroneous views on some of the more im- 
portant doctrines of religion, probably denotes in 
this passsage rather one who causes dissension 
and division in the church, a schismatic, or fac- 
tious person. Yet the former sense can hardly 
be altogether excluded ; for these two things are 
usually conjoined. Those who hold fundamental 
errors, if they are at all sincere and earnest in 
their belief, will almost invariably endeavor to 
propagate their views, and make converts to 
them, thus causing dissension and division among 
brethren : and they, on the other hand, who, for 
whatsoever cause, wish to draw a party to them- 
selves, very generally resort to the device of 
introducing or disseminating some new or un- 
sound doctrine. Such are described by the 

1 Tit. iii. 10. 



72 PREEEQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

apostle as "speaking perverse things, to draw 
away disciples after them." l 

JPedobaptists chargeable with Grave Errors. — 
To apply this part of the subject to the questions 
at issue between us and our Pedobaptist breth- 
ren : Can the doctrine of infant baptism, or the 
belief that sprinkling is scriptural baptism, be 
regarded as a heresy of so serious a nature as to 
require us to decline to unite in church fellowship 
with those who hold it ? Let us clear our minds 
from all odious associations connected with the 
word " heresy," and then look the matter fairly 
in the face, as it must appear from the stand-point 
of Baptist principles. The case may then be 
very plainly stated. There is either that in 
Scripture which requires them to practise only 
the immersion of professed believers for baptism, 
or there is not that in Scripture which requires 
us to practise this ; which is the same as to say, 
there is that in Scripture which requires them to 
become Baptists, or there is not that in Scripture 
w T hich justifies us in remaining Baptists. To 
accommodate Baxter's comprehensive expression 
to the subject before us, "They go in a way 

lr Acts xx. SO. 



AN ORDERLY WALK. 73 

which hath neither precept nor example to war- 
rant it, from a way which hath a full current of 
both ;" or else we and our Baptist fathers have 
been altogether wrong from the beginning. And 
if the views of Baptists are in accordance with 
Scripture, the error of our Pedobaptist brethren 
is not a trivial one. Such results as these follow, 
in our view, from their principles and practice : 
That the baptized are not members of the church, 
or that membership in the church is not volun- 
tary ; that there are two sorts of baptism, one of 
which is a profession of the faith of the person 
baptized, and the other is a profession of the 
faith of another person; that regeneration is 
given in and by baptism, or that the church is, 
by the law of its constitution, necessarily com- 
posed in great part of persons who do not give, 
and were never supposed to give, any evidence 
of regeneration ; that the church has a right to 
change essentially one of Christ's institutions, or 
that it is unessential whether it be observed as 
he ordained it or in some other manner ; that 
baptism may rightfully be administered in a way 
which makes much of the language in which it 
is described in the Scriptures wholly unsuitable 



74 PKEREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

and inapplicable, and which does not at all repre- 
sent the facts and doctrines which baptism is 
declared in the Scriptures to represent ; that the 
Scriptures are not, in all religious matters, the 
sufficient and only binding rule of faith and 
practice ; — all these errors, which, according to 
our views as Baptists, result from their principles 
and practice, are in our judgment very serious. 
These consequences result, I repeat, according to 
our views as Baptists ; for the question before us 
is, not how we ought to regard them individually 
as Christians, but what ought to be our rule of 
proceeding as a denomination towards them as 
Pedobaptists, chargeable, on our principles, and 
according to our settled conviction, with a two- 
fold perversion of one of the most important 
institutions of Christianity. Baptists have from 
the beginning regarded it as a religious duty to 
bear testimony against these errors ; the occasion 
for that testimony has neither ceased nor changed ; 
so long as that occasion continues, there will be 
good reason why the Baptist denomination should 
exist ; and so long as there is good reason why 
we should exist as a distinct denomination, there 
will be good reason why our church fellowship 



AN ORDERLY WALK. 75 

should be limited to those who agree with us in 
protesting against these errors. Our protest,' in 
order to be consistent, must be both verbal and 
practical. 

Mixed Communion neutralizes our Protest 
against these Errors. — But mixed communion 
not only nullifies entirely the most important 
part of our protest, the practical ; not only makes 
us say one thing in word, and the contrary in 
practice ; but it also powerfully tends to suppress 
even the verbal part of our protest. Mixed com- 
munion tends directly and logically to mixed 
membership ; and mixed membership tends di- 
rectly and logically to the extinction of Baptist 
churches, and the suppression of Baptist princi- 
ples. This is all very well, if we are wrong, and 
our fathers before us were wrong ; but it is very 
ill if they were right, and we are right, in our 
views and practice on the subject of baptism. 
That tfie tendency of mixed communion is such 
as I have represented it, is admitted by Mr. Hall. 
The result which he foresaw as likely to follow 
from the adoption of his principles of communion, 
and which he did not deprecate, was, as expressed 
in his own words, that the term Baptist would 



76 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

come to be applicable, not to churches, but only 
to individuals. But we have more conclusive 
evidence on this subject than the admission of 
Mr. Hall. Facts that have taken place in Eng- 
land since his day, and as the direct practical 
result of his principles, are the plainest proof of 
the tendency of those principles. The adminis- 
tration of believers' baptism on a week-day 
evening, to avoid giving offence to the Pedo- 
baptist members of the church ; the reception, 
without baptism, of persons who have renounced 
their belief that the ceremony performed upon 
them in infancy was valid ; a manifest disposition 
to give up the Lord's Supper, as non-essential, 
where the cause of peace and union is supposed 
to demand this sacrifice ; the banishment of 
scriptural teaching on the subject of baptism 
from the pulpit, and even from the private con- 
versation of the minister with his people, as a 
stipulated condition of the continuance of the 
pastoral relation ; the discipline and exclusion of 
members for the offence of propagating Baptist 
sentiments ; the relaxation of all scriptural church 
discipline ; and, after all, unpleasant collisions with 
Pedobaptist churches ; — these legitimate logical 



AN ORDERLY WALK. 77 

consequences, and certified actual results, of 
mixed communion, are more than enough to 
stamp it as a practice at war with truth, purity, 
liberty, and union. 1 

IV. SCHISM. 

It has already been remarked that Schism, 
which was the fourth form of disorderly walking 
specified, is usually found connected with heresy 
in fact, as we have seen it connected in Scripture. 
As the passages quoted under the former head 
are pertinent to this division also, I will only 
add one from the Epistle to the Romans, which, 
like the others, couples these two offences 
together : " Now I beseech you, brethren, 
mark them which cause divisions and offences 
contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned ; 
and avoid them." 2 

We think we might easily sustain the charge 
of schism against Pedobaptists as a body ; for if 
they are the party who have departed from the 



1 See Curtis on Communion, Appendix H. pp. 296-8, and J. G. Fuller's Reply 
to Robert Hall, in Baptist Library, vol. \. pp. 223 and 276-8. 

2 xvi. 17. 



78 PEEEEQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

way of Scripture in regard to the mode and sub- 
jects of baptism, they are the party who are 
responsible for all the divisions and dissensions 
which have resulted from that departure. 

Mixed Communion promotes Schism. — But, 
aside from this, the practice of intercommunion 
with them on our part is seen in fact, as intimated 
above, to gender strife. How " can two," much 
less two hundred, "walk together, except they 
be agreed?" 1 How can Baptists and Pedo- 
baptists comply with the apostle's injunction to 
the members of the church in Corinth? How 
can they " all speak the same thing, and be per- 
fectly joined together in the same mind and in 
the same judgment ? " 2 It is not difficult to see 
how they can live in peace together in the same 
community, and mutually esteem and love each 
other, and have much cordial and delightful com- 
munion and co-operation, while they abide in 
separate ecclesiastical organizations, and each 
understands the other's liberty, and respects the 
other's conscience, and expects the other to main- 
tain and propagate his peculiar views by all hon- 
orable and Christian methods ; though even then 

l Amos iii. 3. 2 1 Cor. i. 10. 



AN OEDEELY WALK. 79 

the difference that requires their separation must 
seem to both parties a serious evil : but how they 
are to live and work harmoniously together in 
one church fellowship and under one church law, 
is in theory a mystery past finding out, and in 
practice certainly a problem yet unsolved. The 
things about which they differ are matters that 
particularly and vitally affect church relations. 
If they are peaceably united in those relations, it 
can only be on the condition that one of the par- 
ties shall consent to see, without protest, what 
they regard as a pernicious human invention con- 
stantly performed in the church as a divine rite ; 
and that the other party shall consent to see, 
without protest, what they regard as a sacred 
parental duty systematically neglected. These 
are compromises which neither party have a right 
to demand, and to which neither party have a 
right to consent. And happily there is too much 
of conscience in both parties to permit a peace- 
able and lasting union on such unchristian terms. 
Yes, happily ; for so long as our present differ- 
ence of views continues, it would be a disgrace 
to us both if we could be cordially united in 
church relations. May Baptists never become so 



80 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

degenerate as to consent to say, by their silent 
acquiescence, either that infant sprinkling is a 
divine rite or a matter of indifference. And 
may Pedobaptists never become so degenerate 
as to consent, by their silent acquiescence, to the 
neglect of parental and religious duty on the 
part of their brethren. 

AN OBJECTION ANSWERED. 

It may perhaps be objected that the passages 
cited under the four preceding sub-divisions refer 
to church fellowship in a general way, without 
any specific reference to the Lord's Supper. In 
reply to this objection, I would answer, in the 
first place, that having endeavored previously to 
establish the position that the Lord's Supper is 
an ordinance to be celebrated in the church, and 
expressive of church fellowship, I felt at liberty 
to use the passages that enjoin the withdrawal of 
that fellowship as constructively enjoining exclu- 
sion from the Communion, which is its chief 
token. I answer, secondly, that the principle 
here assumed seems to me to pervade the scrip- 
tural teachings so thoroughly, that it is next to 



AX ORDERLY WALK. 81 

impossible to lay down any scriptural terms of 
communion at the Lord's table, except upon the 
admission that the ordinance is inseparably con- 
nected with church fellowship. To treat the 
subject otherwise, would be, as it appears to me, 
a violent putting asunder of what the Lord has 
joined together. The objection suggests an addi- 
tional argument in favor of our position that the 
Lord's Supper is a church ordinance. 

RECAPITULATION. 

In the four above-named requisites, then, we 
find the scriptural terms of admission to the 
Lord's Supper. None should be admitted to a 
participation in this rite but those who avow 
themselves to be disciples of Christ, who have 
professed their faith in him by baptism, who are 
members of some visible church, and who walk 
in an orderly manner, according to the precepts 
of the gospel. The want of any one of these 
requisites is a disqualification for admission to the 
Lord's Supper. 

6 



82 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

OBJECTIONS CONSIDEKED. 

In treating of the above scriptural prerequisites 
to the participation of the Lord's Supper, I have 
already forestalled some of the objections which 
are commonly urged against the practice of Bap- 
tists, in confining their church fellowship to those 
who, in their judgment, possess these scriptural 
qualifications. But as various other objections 
are brought against what is called our Close Com- 
munion (the term Close Baptism would be more 
pertinent ; but it does not grieve us to be found 
adhering closely to the word of God and prim- 
itive practice in regard to either ordinance), I will 
notice in order the most common and the most 
important of these objections. 

I. PRIMITIVE RULES NOT APPLICABLE NOW. 

Some persons who admit that the prerequisites 
above named were indispensable in the times of 
apostolical purity and unity, deny that they 
ought to be held indispensable in the present 
altered condition of things. The churches of 
Christ, they say, have unhappily come into an 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 83 

abnormal, distracted condition ; truth and holi- 
ness are found in a measure in all, at least in all 
evangelical denominations ; and they are not found 
in perfection in any, certainly not among Bap- 
tists. The same causes which were, or would have 
been, just bars to the Communion in the days of 
the apostles, are not necessarily so now. We 
have to do with classes of persons which had no 
representatives in apostolical times ; — with per- 
sons unquestionably regenerate, who delay bap- 
tism, not from an unwillingness to obey Christ's 
command, but from doubts or ignorance as to 
their duty; and with persons unquestionably 
regenerate, and just as unquestionably unbap- 
tized, who remain unbaptized for no other reason 
but that they misunderstand the Lord's command, 
and sincerely think' they have received baptism. 
Rigid rules, derived from times of primitive 
purity and unity, require to be modified, it is 
said, when transferred to a time and a condition 
of things so greatly altered. So far as the judg- 
ment of individual character is concerned, we 
fully admit that the altered condition of things 
demands a very important modification of our 
conclusions. We do judge of our Pedobaptist 



84 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

brethren very differently from what the Scrip- 
tures would have required us to judge, in prim- 
itive times, of any who should then have refused 
to be baptized. 

The Laws of Christ unchangeable.— -But though 
the times have changed, we suppose that the will 
of the Lord, in regard to the constitution of his 
church, and the nature and mode of his ordi- 
nances, has not changed at all. We suppose that, 
through all changes of time and circumstance, he 
requires us to keep the ordinances as he delivered 
them to us ; that they remain essentially un- 
changeable, until he sees fit to change them. 
We know that the times change ; that men 
change ; that " all flesh is as grass, and all the 
glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass 
withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: 
but the word of the Lord endureth forever." 1 
No man must add anything to that, or take any- 
thing from it. 

The Primitive Order ought to be restored.— And 
in regard to this matter, we suppose that such 
questions as these are pertinent : how has it come 
to pass that there is so great a difference between 

l 1 Pet. i. 24, 25; 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 85 

primitive times and ours ? Is it an evil to be 
deplored, and, if possible, remedied? If it is, 
have we any responsibility in the matter ? Are 
we bound to consider whether the influence of 
our principles and practice tends to perpetuate, 
or to correct, the evil ? In the answers to such 
questions as these, we find our duty plainly 
pointed out. Our principles and practice must 
not be so conformed to the existing state of 
things as to imply that we are reconciled to it, 
or that we despair of seeing the primitive order 
restored: they must not be so modified as to 
part with their tendency to restore the primitive 
order. On any other principle, error becomes its 
own justification ; the more some men disobey 
the commands of Christ, the less other men are 
bound to obey them; and every perversion of 
his truth and every corruption of his ordinances 
propagates and perpetuates itself without rem- 
edy, unless he miraculously interpose to prevent. 
On any other principle, his kingship in Zion is an 
empty title, and fallible and changeable men be- 
come practically the supreme lawgivers in his 
church. We have nof so learned Christ. We 
believe that we arc bound to observe, and to 



86 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

teach others, as far as our precept and example 
can influence them, to observe all things what- 
soever he has commanded, even unto the end of 
the world. 1 We know that there are sundry edi- 
tions of his "Revised Statutes" abroad in the 
world ; but we do not regard them as genuine ; 
they are not published " by authority ; " they do 
not bear the royal signature and seal. We be- 
lieve that we are bound to withdraw ourselves 
from every brother that walketh disorderly, yet 
not to count him as an enemy, but to admonish 
him as a brother. 2 And we believe that these 
plain principles of reason and precepts of Scrip- 
ture require us to persevere in that course which 
we have hitherto pursued in regard to the terms 
of admission to the Lord's Supper, and which has 
resulted, with the blessing of God, in wholly 
reclaiming so many from their error, and in par- 
tially reclaiming multitudes more. 

Some objectors to our strict communion, while 
they admit that the terms above mentioned are 
ordinarily prerequisite, urge that these terms may 
lawfully and properly be sometimes dispensed 
with, out of regard tt) principles that are 

1 Matt, xxviii. 20. 2 2 Thess. iii. 14, 15. 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 87 

higher, and considerations that are more impor- 
tant. There are several forms of objection, 
which may be included under this general de- 
scription. 

II. BAPTISM ONLY AN EXTERNAL EITE. 

It is said by some that Baptism is, after all, but 
an external rite ; and that we ought not to be so 
punctilious about it as to let it interfere with that 
law of Christian love which is so much higher 
and more fundamental. We answer, that we do 
not by any means put baptism on an equality 
with that love which is the fulfilling of the law. 
"We do not let our views in regard to this ordi- 
nance interfere with the exercise of our Christian 
affection towards all who love our Lord in sin- 
cerity. But communing with them in the Lord's 
Supper is a form of fellowship which we think 
he intended to be expressive of something more 
than the love which every disciple owes to his 
fellow-disciple, and to be limited to those who 
possess certain other qualifications besides love 
to him, — qualifications which, in our judgment, 
are not possessed by our Peclobaptist brethren. 



88 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

Those who find fault with our practice on this 
ground seem to me to fall themselves into the 
very error in regard to the Communion with 
which they charge us in regard to Baptism. 
They magnify it unduly, as if there were no 
other expression of Christian love but that ; as 
if there could be no Christian love or fellowship 
between those who do not commune together at 
the Lord's table. While they remind us that 
Baptism is but an external rite, they seem to for- 
get that the Lord's Supper is an external rite too. 
Our Lord saw fit to appoint both these exter- 
nal rites ; and therefore it is fit that we should 
observe them both, and observe them in the way 
and the order of his appointment. If there had 
been any incompatibility between the strict ob- 
servance of them and the fulfilment of the great 
law of love, he would either not have appointed 
them, or else he would have given us an express 
license to dispense with them whenever in our 
judgment obedience to that higher law should 
require. But his voice says to us, " If ye love 
me, keep my commandments." * And we do not 
find that those who' are most careless about exter- 

1 Juo. xiv. 15. 



• OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 89 

nal duties are most careful to comply with more 
spiritual requirements. These ought we to do, 
and not to leave the other undone. 1 

We add, also,- in answer to this objection, that 
the great law of love does not allow us to be 
silent when we see our brother in error. It 
requires us to rebuke his error, in word and deed. 
We must do this with love and tenderness 
indeed ; but we must not refrain from doing it. 

III. PEDOBAPTISTS THINK THEMSELVES BAPTIZED. 

Another form of objection to our practice is 
this. Our Pedobaptist brethren sincerely think 
they have been baptized : why should we not 
show respect to their conscientious convictions 
by receiving them to that privilege for which 
they are fully persuaded in their own minds that 
they are qualified? I answer, If they conscien- 
tiously believe they have been baptized, that is a 
good reason why they should act as though they 
believed it; and if we conscientiously believe 
the contrary, that is just as good a reason why 
we should act as though we believed the con- 

l Matt, xxiii. 23. 



90 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

trary. They see no reason why they should not 
commune at the Lord's table. Let them do so. 
We put no hindrance in their way. Is not that 
enough ? Are we required to show our respect 
for their consciences by uniting with them in 
doing a thing which they think to be proper, but 
which we do not ? Do we not owe some respect 
to our own consciences ? Do they not owe some 
respect to ours, as well as we to theirs ? Is their 
conscience to be the rule of our action, as well as 
of theirs ? Especially, is the conscience of indi- 
viduals among them to give law to our churches ? 
Before we can consistently co-operate in any 
religious service, we must be agreed as to what 
the Lord requires of us severally in relation to 
the matter in hand. 

IV. STRICT COMMUNION A HINDRANCE TO UNION. 

But one of the most common grounds on 
which it is urged that we ought to invite Pedo- 
baptists to our communion is, that by doing so 
we should promote Christian union, and so re- 
move one of the greatest reproaches from the 
Christian cause. Our Lord's prayer for the union 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 91 

of his people is appealed to ; and our practice in 
regard to the Communion is often spoken of as 
if it were one of the chief obstacles to the realiza- 
tion of what our Saviour prayed for so earnestly. 
This, probably, is with many the most effective 
argument in favor of relaxing our rule in respect 
to the Lord's Supper. Strange things are done 
and demanded now-a-days in the abused name 
of Christian Union. Let us look a little more 
closely at this demand. 

Truth before Union. — In the first place, the 
only union which our Lord desires for his people 
is, union in the truth. He does not command 
nor permit us to sacrifice truth for the sake of 
union. Both are good ; but if we must choose 
between them, let us prefer truth. And let us 
never forget, that however noble and Christian 
enthusiasm for union may be, enthusiasm for 
truth is nobler and more Christian still. " Buy 
the truth, and sell it not." x Sell it not, even for 
union ; no, not even a single grain of truth for a 
solid globe of union. If the two-edged sword 
of truth, which proceedeth out of the mouth of 
Christ, severs us, let it cut, " even to the dividing 

1 Prov. xxiii. 23. 



92 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and 
marrow," 1 — even to the setting "a man at vari- 
ance against his father, and the daughter against 
her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her 
mother-in-law." 2 I am afraid this last passage is 
overlooked or forgotten by those who try to hin- 
der persons who are convinced of the truth of 
Baptist views from joining Baptist churches, by 
appealing to their love of parents and other rela- 
tives, from whom they must separate at the 
Communion table. Surely they do not consider 
what master they are serving, nor what a perilous 
snare they are setting for souls, when they thus 
tempt others to follow the dictates of natural 
affection in preference to what they believe to be 
the will of Christ. Neither church union nor 
family union is to be purchased at that fatal 
price. 

A Good Conscience before Union. — Again, 
our Lord does not wish his people to sacrifice a 
good conscience for the sake of union. If any 
form or expression of union is proposed to us in 
which we cannot participate without grave doubts 
whether we are doing right in his sight, then he 

1 Deb. v. 12. 3 Matt. x. 35. 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 93 

certainly will not be pleased with us if we parti- 
cipate in it in spite of our doubts. " Whatsoever 
is not of faith is sin." 1 

Allegiance to Christ before Union. — Neither 
will the Lord be pleased with us if in our anxiety 
for union we let our complaisance to his people 
overrule our allegiance to him. We must not 
sacrifice any portion of that allegiance on the altar 
of union. If we believe that he has committed 
to us a special trust, and laid upon us a special 
responsibility, in regard to the maintenance of 
one or both the two expressive symbolical rites 
of his religion, he certainly will not look upon us 
with favor if we betray this trust, if we shake off 
this responsibility, under the pretence or the plea 
of promoting union. 

JSaptists called unto /Strictness. — And this is 
just what we do believe : and it is precisely on this 
ground that we meet the charge of undue strict- 
ness and punctiliousness in regard to external or- 
dinances. We do believe that we are bound, by 
fidelity to Christ, to be strict, to be punctilious, if 
any choose to call it so, in upholding our views 
in regard to these two ordinances of Christ's 

l Rom. xiv. 23. 



94 PREPwEQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

house. We do believe, though these may seem 
to some but vain words, that he has called us to 
just this service ; that he has given us our exist- 
ence, our permanence, our enlargement, for this 
specific purpose, — that we might maintain Bap- 
tism in its scriptural form and place, and in its 
appointed relation to the Lord's Supper; and that 
we might keep up a consistent and perpetual pro- 
test, in word and deed, against the perversion of 
both these ordinances. And even though it be 
true that this mission of ours, to use a common 
and convenient term, is attended with the danger 
of unduly magnifying these ordinances, or of think- 
ing more highly of ourselves than we ought to 
think, on account of our adherence to the primi- 
tive pattern in respect to them, yet we do not feel 
at liberty to decline to fulfil the assigned duty on 
account of the attendant danger. 

Baptists not responsible for the Separation. 
— But if it were certain that the joint participa- 
tion of the Lord's Supper by Baptists and other 
denominations was the particular manifestation of 
Christian union just now imperatively demanded, 
we should still feel at liberty to ask, On whose 
part is the change of practice called for ? With 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 95 

whom rests the responsibility of perpetuating this 
lamentable separation ? With those who have 
kept the ordinances as the Lord delivered them, 
or with those who have perverted them ? Nay, 
more, the position of many of our Pedobaptist 
brethren justifies us in asking, Which ought to 
make the sacrifice for the sake of union, — we, of 
our convictions of duty, or they, of their conven- 
ience and preference ? For while we cannot 
conscientiously admit the validity of their bap- 
tism, they almost universally admit the validity 
of ours ; and while we cannot conscientiously re- 
gard infant baptism as anything more than a hu- 
man ceremony, a large and growing proportion of 
them declare plainly, by their practical neglect of 
it, that they can with a good conscience give it 
up. To all this numerous class of Pedobaptists 
we say, that if our separation from them at the 
communion table is any obstacle to the progress 
of Christian union, or any grief to them, it belongs 
to them to remove it, and not to us. If they are 
enough in love with Christian union to be will- 
ing to forego their preferences, instead of asking 
us to violate our consciences, there is no reason 
why this stumbling-block should not be wholly 



96 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

taken out of the way, so far as we and they are 
concerned, in the course of a few years. If they 
will henceforth practise only believers' baptism 
by immersion, which they certainly can do with- 
out any scruple of conscience, even if they cannot 
go to the extent of admitting that infant sprink- 
ling is unlawful, the separating wall between us 
will soon be broken down. 

Baptism a Symbol of Ecclesiastical Union. — 
But this matter of baptism has a more direct and 
important connection with Christian union than 
through its relation to the Lord's Supper. There 
is quite as much reason for regarding the former 
rite as symbolical of the union with one another 
of all who are united to Christ, as there is for so 
regarding the latter. It is true that the Apostle 
says to the Corinthians, " We, being many, are 
one body, for we all partake of the one loaf;" l 
but it is equally true that the same apostle says 
to the same Corinthians, " By one Spirit we are 
all baptized into one body." 2 And still more 
pertinent to our purpose are his words to the 
Ephesians, "Endeavor to keep the unity of the 
Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, 

l 1 Cor. x. 17. 2 xii. 13. 



OBJECTIONS COXSIDEEEI). 97 

and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope 
of your calling ; one Lord, one faith, one bap- 
tism, one God and Father of all." x Pedobap- 
tists and we have not now one baptism. Theirs 
and ours, though called by the same name, are 
two distinct things. They are administered on 
different grounds, to different sorts of persons, and 
in different modes ; the acts are different, the sub- 
jects are different, the reasons are different : they 
cannot with any propriety be spoken of as one 
baptism. This passage then is our warrant for 
charging upon them the rupture of the bond of 
peace, the severance of the unity of the Spirit ; 
and for calling upon them to re-knit that bond, 
to repair that unity, by returning to that one bap- 
tism, the scriptural character of which is admit- 
ted by themselves, and attested by the unpreju- 
diced scholarship of the whole Christian world. 

Mixed Communion not a Cure, but a Cause, 
of Disunion, — But supposing we were at liberty 
to change our practice in regard to the commu- 
nion, w^e are not by any means convinced that 
Christian union would be promoted by the change. 
What light does the past history of the church 



1 iv. 3-6. 



98 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNIOX. 

shed upon this subject ? The desire for Christian 
union has grown up to its present dimensions, in 
spite, shall I say? of our alleged exclusiveness. 
The spirit of union has, undeniably I think, been 
constantly increasing, while we have been bear- 
ing our uncompromising testimony on the sub- 
ject of baptism. Zeal for Christian union has 
manifested itself most in those parts of Christen- 
dom where Baptists are most numerous. One of 
the greatest obstacles in the world to that union 
has been, and is, the civil inequality of different 
denominations, resulting from the unhallowed 
alliance between the church and the state ; and 
that hindrance to Christian union has been op- 
posed more constantly, at greater sacrifices, and 
with greater success, by Baptists, than by any 
other denomination of Christians. If Christian 
liberty — freedom to worship God without inter- 
ference from the civil power — is an important 
means and an indispensable precursor of Chris- 
tian union, the verdict of history will show that 
Baptists have been foremost in promoting union 
in this respect. They have been standard bear- 
ers in many a hard-fought battle for freedom of 
conscience ; and they are doing and suffering in 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 99 

the same cause in more than one kingdom of 
Europe even now. 

It does not appear, then, that Baptists are espe- 
cially responsible for the divisions that prevail 
among Christians. It does not appear that there 
is any special reason why ice should be called 
on to deny our conscientious convictions and 
forego our denominational existence for the sake 
of uniting the divided body of Christ. Since 
the cause of union has prospered so well and 
advanced so wonderfully, while we have adhered 
to our present principles and practice, there does 
not seem to be any reasonable prospect of pro- 
moting that cause by changing either. Nay, we 
think the prospect is just the reverse. Instead 
of healing the divisions of Zion by changing our 
rule of communion, w T e should be far more likely 
to increase them. The results which might 
reasonably be expected to ensue are such as 
these : 

1. In the first place, extensive alienations of 
feeling, discord and division in Baptist churches. 
For the number of our churches must be very 
small indeed in which such a change could be 
introduced with anything like unanimity, or even 



100 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

without energetic remonstrance and decided oppo- 
sition. 

2. In the next place, it would result at once in 
adding one to the present number of Christian 
sects, at least in this country, by dividing the 
Baptist denomination into two. No one, I am 
persuaded, can soberly entertain the belief that 
our churches as a whole could be induced to 
acquiesce in such a departure from the principles 
which we have always held to be scriptural, and 
the usages which we have always held to be bind- 
ing. And although there are those who bear with 
us the common name of Baptists, who have always 
practised mixed communion, yet inasmuch as 
there are other doctrinal and ecclesiastical differ- 
ences which would prevent us from coalescing 
with them, the result would be, as before stated, 
the formation of one more sect. 

3. And in the third place, such a change on our 
part as the adoption, by any considerable number 
of our churches, of the practice of mixed commu- 
nion, would introduce a new element of discord 
into other denominations. For our new practice 
could have no other justification than the princi- 
ple that baptism is not a prerequisite to the par- 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 101 

ticipation of the Lord's Supper. This principle 
is admitted by the ablest advocates of mixed 
communion; and mixed communion has tended 
to give currency to this principle. There is no 
reason to suppose it would be otherwise in the case 
contemplated. But the principle which we thus 
call in question is one in which we and our Pedo- 
baptist brethren have hitherto been happily 
agreed. We can unite with them in the com- 
munion of the Lord's Supper only on a principle 
which neither we nor they nor any denom- 
ination of Christians admit. Thus at the outset 
we inaugurate a new controversy, which we and 
they alike deprecate, and take the most effectual 
method to introduce a new cause of division 
among all denominations. 

Those who would have our churches adopt a 
less strict rule of communion, for the sake of pro- 
moting union among the disciples of Christ, may 
well be asked to look at these probable conse- 
quences of the measure which they countenance. 
They would be sadly disappointed if their remedy 
should be found to aggravate the disease. There 
is no hope of advancing Christian union by a 
measure which threatens to rend asunder thou- 



102 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

sands of Baptist churches, to split one of the 
largest and most united denominations in our 
country into two contending factions, and to cast 
a new apple of discord into the enclosure of every 
other religious sect. 

Mixed Communion a Fictitious Token of 
Union. — But the gravest objection to the pro- 
posed measure as an expression of union remains 
to be stated. It wears to my mind an aspect of 
duplicity and irreverence, — I might say of sacri- 
lege. Consider how the matter stands. We 
desire to unite with Pedobaptists at the Lord's 
table; but we profess ourselves to be Baptists 
still. We cannot receive them as baptized ; they 
do not wish to be received — they would not 
even dare to come — as unbaptized. We repu- 
diate them on the ground on which they come, 
and receive them on the ground which they repu- 
diate. We know that they come as baptized 
persons; they know that we receive them as 
unbaptized persons. Looking towards Pedobap- 
tists, we desire inter-communion on one ground ; 
looking towards Baptists, we defend it on another. 
Such a union as this reminds us very forcibly of 
some compromises of which we read in the earlier 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 103 

history of the church, to say nothing of more 
modern and secular platforms, where a form of 
words is devised in which the two differing parties 
can easily unite, by the simple contrivance of 
understanding the same words in two opposite 
senses. So is it whenever we unite with Pedo- 
baptists in the Communion. We and they are 
known to put different and contradictory con- 
structions upon our act of union. Is this the 
measure that is to heal our divisions ? Is not this 
new Henoticon, this ambiguous reconciler, who 
comes into the church with a lie in his right hand, 
and sits down to play a game of dissimulation at 
the table of the Lord, worthy to be rejected, with 
equal abhorrence, by both Baptists and Pedo- 
baptists ? 



V. WHY NOT INVITE BAPTIZED MEMBERS OF 
PEDOBAPTIST CHURCHES? 

Some persons who admit the legitimacy of the 
terms of Communion already laid down, and 
assent to the propriety of our rule in ordinary 
cases, find fault with our strictness in not making 
an exception in favor of that numerous and con- 



104 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

stantly increasing class, the baptized members 
(k Pedobaptist churches. They, it is urged, 
possess the qualifications which we deem indis- 
pensable, and may therefore properly and con- 
sistently be received ; or, as some would prefer 
to say, cannot properly and consistently be 
rejected. Besides, by receiving such, we should, 
it is thought, conciliate the favor of our Pedo- 
baptist brethren, at least of those among them 
who are already favorably disposed towards our 
principles, and thus prepare the way for a more 
rapid diffusion of our views of baptism. 

But the practice of inviting such to partake 
with us of the Lord's Supper seems to me liable 
to these three weighty objections : — 

1. It is a very invidious proceeding. It wears 
the aspect of an attempt to sow the seeds of dis- 
cord in our neighbor's ground. Why should we 
invade their borders, and attempt to apply such 
personal discriminations within the circle of their 
church enclosure ? It is certainly far more dig- 
nified, fraternal, and Christian, to deal with them 
collectively as churches and as denominations. 

2. Secondly, this proceeding seems to me ob- 
jectionable on a more specific and personal 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 105 

ground. These members of Pedobaptist churches, 
though themselves baptized, are actively pro- 
moting, by the influence of their example, those 
errors against which our duty to protest is the 
only charter of our right to exist as a denomi- 
nation. 

3. But, thirdly and chiefly, this practice seems 
to me to be deprecated on the ground that the 
communion of the Lord's Supper proj>erly sym- 
bolizes church fellowship, and is committed to the 
guardianship of churches as such. It was not 
designed, and cannot properly be used, as a token 
of our fellowship for individuals, irrespective of 
their church relations. The rule which applies to 
the whole, applies to all its parts. Separation into 
different denominations implies church disfellow- 
ship ; union at the communion table implies 
church fellowship. If our separation is justifiable, 
there is no consistent basis for inter-communion ; 
if inter-communion is proper, there is no justifi- 
able ground of denominational separation. Bap- 
tist and Pedobaptist churches, immersing and 
sprinkling churches, cannot hold fellowship with 
each other without holding fellowship with what 
they believe to be contrary to Christ's command. 



106 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

We believe that only immersion on a profession 
of faith is valid baptism ; they believe that bap- 
tism may be valid without either of these con- 
ditions. We believe that infant baptism is 
contrary to the Lord's will and appointment; 
they believe, some of them still, — and this is 
what their creeds and confessions still declare, — 
that infant baptism is of divine appointment and 
obligation. Neither party can consistently coun- 
tenance what they regard as the errors of the 
other. And this is a sufficient bar to their inter- 
communion. 

VI. PLEA FOR DISPENSING WITH THE RULE IN 
EXTREME CASES. 

Another special exception to our ordinary rule 
and practice may be pleaded for by some, in 
favor of particular individuals who happen to be 
so situated that if they do not partake of the 
communion in our churches, they will be de- 
prived of the privilege altogether, These are 
extreme cases, and comparatively few in number. 
Such persons, if they desire to partake of the 
communion in our churches, are entitled to be 
treated respectfully and tenderly. But we do 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 107 

not think we have any liberty to depart from 
what we regard as a Scripture rule, in order to 
gratify their desire. And even if we did not 
regard such a departure as unlawful, we should 
still think it inexpedient ; for a wholesome gen- 
eral rule must not bend to accommodate indi- 
vidual feelings, except in very extraordinary 
cases. And it would be very difficult to fix any 
precise and permanent limits to exceptions of this 
sort. They would be likely to encroach more 
and more, until the rule became merely nominal. 

The same principle applies to members of 
Baptist churches who are so situated that they 
cannot receive the Communion unless they re- 
ceive it in Pedobaptist churches. If they are 
fully and intelligently convinced in their con- 
sciences that their Baptist principles are right, 
they will be likely to think it a greater privilege, 
and a more important means of grace, to act 
according to those principles, than to partake of 
the Communion contrary to them. 

I know that some Baptists take the position, 
that as baptized persons they have a perfect right 
to partake of the Lord's Supper whenever and 
wherever they have opportunity. I think that 



108 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

such persons have not duly considered the matter, 
either as a question of propriety and courtesy, 
or of principle and responsibility. In the former 
view, I do not see how we can decently claim a 
privilege which we refuse to reciprocate. And 
in the latter view, I do not see how we can 
regard our act otherwise than as an indorsement 
of their views of the proper qualifications for 
receiving the Lord's Supper. When we volunta- 
rily unite with others in any act, it seems to me 
to be a very expressive acknowledgment, on our 
part, of the fitness of the act on theirs. 



VII. ALLEGED INCONSISTENCY OF OUR PRACTICE. 

Another objection which some bring against 
our practice of strict communion is, that we are 
not consistent with ourselves. This objection 
takes several forms. 

1. We expect to commune with Pedobaptists in 
Heaven. — It is very common for objectors to say 
to us, " You admit that your Pedobaptist breth- 
ren are Christians, and therefore you expect to 
have communion with them in heaven ; how 
inconsistent then to refuse to commune with them 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 109 

on earth." This seems to some a very conclusive 
way of settling the question. But if they will 
only consider that they are but playing at fast 
and loose with a word, they will see at once 
how little reason we have to be embarrassed by 
their objection. They confound two very dis- 
tinct kinds of fellowship, the personal and the 
ecclesiastical, two very distinct senses of the 
word communion, the spiritual and the ritual. 
In the former sense of the word, we do have 
communion on earth with all who love our Lord 
Jesus Christ, whether Baptists or Pedobaptists ; 
we have spiritual fellowship with them all. In 
the latter sense of the word, we do not expect to 
commune in heaven with any, whether Baptists 
or Pedobaptists ; we do not expect to partake of 
the Lord's Supper in heaven. "Whichever sense 
of the word they choose, it equally neutralizes 
the dilemma in which they would involve us, 
and relieves us of the charge of inconsistency. 
They have no right to employ one of these 
senses in their premises and the other in their 
conclusion. 

2. We reject the Better and receive the Worse. 
— Another form in which this charge is preferred 



110 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

against us is this : "You acknowledge the Chris- 
tian character and eminent piety of many of your 
Pedobaptist brethren ; you know that they are far 
superior, in these respects, to many members of 
Baptist churches; and yet you give the Com- 
munion to the latter and refuse it to the former ; 
you reject the better and receive the worse." 
While we freely admit the facts on which this 
objection is founded, the superior worthiness of 
many whom we reject in comparison with many 
whom we receive, we yet find no difficulty in 
meeting this charge of inconsistency. We believe 
that the Lord requires, as qualifications for coming 
to his table, certain conditions, partly moral and 
spiritual, and partly external and ceremonial. 
The former are certainly much the more impor- 
tant, in a general estimate of character ; but both 
are equally required in the case in question, and 
we have no more authority to dispense with the 
latter than we have to dispense with the former : 
we have no authority to dispense with either. 
The former are, from the nature of the case, sus- 
ceptible of being more readily ascertained, and 
more perfectly applied, than the latter. But 
because we are inevitably liable to err, in endeav- 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. Ill 

oring to apply one part of our Lord's rule, it does 
not follow that we are at liberty to be negligent 
in applying another part of it, where there is no 
such difficulty. The objection here urged does 
not lie against us more than others. How is it 
with Pedobaptists ? Do they not withhold the 
Communion from all whom they regard as unbap- 
tized, however much some of these may excel in 
piety many of their communicants? Yet this 
does not argue that they think baptism more 
important than piety. The truth is, that the 
principle on which this objection is founded, 
however specious it may seem, is entirely falla- 
cious. Our rules of ecclesiastical proceeding, 
of according or withholding church privileges, 
cannot be based on the comparative piety of 
different individuals or denominations. " We 
have a more sure word, unto which we do well 
to take heed." The argument which rests on 
this principle refutes itself by proving a great 
deal too much. "The Lord loves and honors 
our Pedobaptist brethren ; therefore, we ought to 
give up our strict communion, that we may be 
one with those whom the Lord owns." That is 
one application of the principle. "The Lord 



112 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

loves and honors us Baptists, too ; therefore, our 
Pedobaptist brethren ought to give up their 
sprinkling and infant-baptism, that they may be 
one with those whom the Lord owns." That is 
another application of precisely the same princi- 
ple. Perhaps our Pedobaptist brethren would 
think us assuming if we went farther, and inti- 
mated, that, in regard to the chief matters in 
dispute between us, the Lord is showing which 
he loves and honors most, by the growing favor 
with which our views are received among them. 
Nay, let us rather regard it as a proof of his love 
to them^ that he is revealing his truth to them 
more and more clearly. In this we have a right 
to rejoice. 

3. We recognize Pedobaptist s as Brethren. — 
There is one more form in which we have to meet 
the charge of inconsistency. "You co-operate 
with your brethren of other denominations 
in enterprises of Christian benevolence, — in 
Bible Societies, Tract Societies, Sunday-School 
Unions, and various other evangelical and mis- 
sionary works; you do not scruple to unite 
with them in Union prayer meetings, and in 
devotional exercises generally ; you do not even 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 113 

hesitate to acknowledge their ministers as faithful 
ministers of the gospel, by inviting them into 
your pulpits ; and yet you will not admit them 
to the Lord's table." We do indeed co-op- 
erate with them, and. recognize them, in these 
various ways, as brethren in the Lord, honored and 
beloved. We do so cheerfully, heartily, and, 
as we think, consistently, although we cannot 
invite them to unite with us in celebrating the 
Lord's Supper. Our justification is, that none of 
the forms of fraternal fellowship in which we so 
freely and gladly associate with them, imply what 
our inter-communion with them in that rite 
would imply. None of these acts of ours imply 
that they are members of our churches, or quali- 
fied to become such. None of these acts imply 
that we are in church fellowship Avith them. 
None of these acts imply that we regard them 
as baptized persons. Our view of the instituted 
relation between the two ordinances of the 
Lord's house is such, that we dare not invite 
to a participation of the Lord's Supper many 
with whom we rejoice to mingle in various inter- 
changes of Christian fellowship. The fact that 
they are in our view unbaptized is a specific and 
8 



114 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

absolute bar to that particular form of fellowship 
•which union at the Lord's table symbolizes and 
expresses. 

YIII. ALLEGED IMPOLICY OF OUR PRACTICE. 

This consideration is pertinent only on the 
supposition that Ave are at liberty to change our 
practice if we judged it expedient. Conceding 
this, for the sake of argument, I maintain that 
we should gain nothing by the change. Mr. 
Hall presents the opposite view in the following 
words : after laying down the principle, " that no 
set of men are entitled to prescribe, as an indis- 
pensable condition of communion, what the 
New Testament has not enjoined as a condition 
of salvation," he says, "the writer is persuaded 
that a departure from this principle in the 
denomination to which he belongs has been ex- 
tremely injurious, not only to the credit and 
prosperity of that particular body (which is 
a very subordinate consideration), but to the 
general interests of truth; and that but for the 
obstruction arising from that quarter, the views 
they entertain of one of the sacraments would 



OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 115 

have obtained a more extensive prevalence. By 
keeping themselves in a state of separation and 
seclusion from other Christians, they have not 
only evinced an inattention to some of the 
most important injunctions of Scripture, but 
have raised up an invincible barrier to the 
propagation of their sentiments beyond the 
precincts of their own party." l 

Reasoning from general principles, the oppo- 
site conclusion seems to me altogether more just. 
Any particular truth or principle will be likely to 
attract attention, respect, and examination, just 
in proportion to the openness, firmness, and con- 
sistency with which those who receive it manifest 
in practice their sense of its importance. But it 
is unnecessary to discuss the question on abstract 
grounds. The evidence of facts is decisive. 
Those which I have already cited under a former 
head show that, in England, the practice of 
mixed communion has operated to suppress dis- 
cussion, — not only to prevent the extension of 
Baptist principles, but even to deprive Baptists 
themselves of the liberty of avowing and advo- 
cating them. When Robert Hall died, thirty 

1 Vol. i. p. 285. 



116 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

years ago (1831), there were more than 100,000 
Baptists in England, and less than 400,000 in the 
United States. The population of England has 
increased since then from 13,000,000 to 20,000,- 
000; but the number of Baptists remains about 
the same. The population of the United States, 
which was then about the same as that of Eng- 
land, has fully doubled ; but the number of Bap- 
tists has much more than kept pace with this 
rapid increase, having risen from less than 400,000 
to more than 1,000,000. Thus it appears that 
in England, where mixed communion has gen- 
erally prevailed, our numbers have diminished, 
compared with the population, in the ratio of 
thirty-three per cent. ; while in this country, where 
strict communion has been the rule, our numbers 
have increased, relatively to the population, in 
the ratio of about fifty per cent. And it ought to 
be taken into account, moreover, that this increase 
has taken place in our country under the signal 
disadvantage, that our growth has been derived 
in great part from immigration and the accession 
of new territory ; and that, of the population thus 
added, a large proportion has been composed of 
Romanists, and a very small per cent, of Baptists; 



CONCLUSION. 117 

while in England the increase of population has 
been mainly natural. Add to this, that in our 
country the influence of Baptist principles has 
greatly modified the views and usages of other 
denominations, so that immersion is quite exten- 
sively practised, and infant baptism quite exten- 
sively neglected, by those who are not called 
Baptists ; whereas no such approximation to our 
views and practice has taken place in England. 
It is plain that Mr. Hall was mistaken, in sup- 
posing that the best way for Baptists to obtain 
credit and currency for their principles would be 
to practise inter-communion at the Lord's table 
with other denominations. Where the obstruc- 
tion which he deplored has been removed, we 
have lost ground ; where it has been retained, we 
have rapidly advanced : his invincible barrier has 
proved a mighty lever of progress. As a ques- 
tion of policy merely, there can be no dispute 
about the expediency of adhering to our strictness. 

CONCLUSION. 

Thus, from every view which we take of the 
question, we come back to the conclusion, that 



118 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

our restricted communion rests on good grounds 
of reason and Scripture. It is right; it is con- 
sistent ; it is expedient. Let us very briefly sum 
up, in conclusion, the grounds on which we object 
to mixed communion. If we are to practise 
inter-communion with Pedobaptists, we must seek 
our justification for it in one of these four princi- 
ples; either, 

1. That baptism is not prerequisite to the 
participation of the Lord's Supper ; or, 

2. That immersion on profession of faith is 
not essential to baptism ; or, 

3. That the individual, and not the church, is 
to be judge of his qualification for admission to 
the Communion; or, 

4. That the church has no responsibility in 
regard to the qualifications of those who come to 
her communion. 

If we say that baptism is not prerequisite to 
the Communion, we place ourselves in opposi- 
tion to the belief and practice of all times and 
churches. 

If we say that immersion or profession of faith 
is not essential to baptism, we renounce Baptist 
principles altogether. 



CONCLTTSIOX. 119 

If we say that the individual, not the church, 
is to be the judge of his qualification for the 
communion, we adopt a principle which is con- 
trary to sound reason, and fatal to the very ends 
for which the church of Christ was constituted. 
For if the conscience of the individual is to be 
the rule of the action of the church in regard to 
his admission to the Lord's Supper, why not also 
in regard to his regeneration, and his doctrinal 
belief, and his obedience to Christ's commands 
generally ? 

If we say that the church has no responsibility 
in regard to admitting persons to the table of 
the Lord, we abandon the cherished principle of 
the independence of the churches, and their 
accountableness to Christ, and we overthrow the 
foundations of all church discipline. 

Finally, brethren, I am persuaded that we do 
well in this matter to continue in the path of 
strictness in the application of scrijotural princi- 
ples to both the ordinances of Christ's house. 
God has greatly honored and blessed us in the 
course which we have hitherto pursued, and I 
hear no voice of his providence or his Spirit bid- 
ding us to reverse our practice. I think we have 



120 PREREQUISITES TO COMMUNION. 

abundant reason to be satisfied with the position 
which we occupy as a denomination in reference 
to the two symbolical rites of our religion. Nay, 
more, I think our position in reference to the 
Christian ordinances is eminently adapted to give 
exercise and discipline to the noblest qualities of 
Christian manhood. It allows us to indulge our 
fraternal regards, and extend our fraternal cour- 
tesies, towards all who love our Lord Jesus Christ, 
up to the point where we must choose whether 
complaisance to them, or loyalty to him, shall be 
our guiding principle ; and there it bids us stop. 
It allows us to show that we love Christ's people 
much, but compels us to show that w^e love 
Christ himself more. It gives large liberty for 
the exercise of Christian charity, but insists 
imperatively on the exercise of Christian consci- 
entiousness. "Christo et JEcclesice" 'is its motto: 
not the Church and Christ ; not union with our 
brethren first, and then, as far as may be, with 
him ; but union with him, fidelity to him, first, 
by all means, and at all hazards ; and then union 
with our brethren, as far as may be, as far as he has 
already made plain to us and to them a common 
rule to walk by. We shall never find, and need 



CONCLUSION. 121 

never covet, a position more honorable and more 
Christian than this. And as it must be by acting on 
just these principles, if at all, that all Christians 
will come at last to the unity of the faith and of 
the knowledge of the Son of God, so it is by a 
steadfast adherence to these principles that we 
shall best perform our part, as a denomination, 
towards insuring and hastening that much-desired 
and long-sought consummation. 



Ja- 24 1861 



m 



fafaMe ffl&nxfo, 

PUBLISHED BY 

GOULD AND LINCOLN, 

59 WASHINGTON STREET, BOSTON. 



-<K)^00- 



CHRISTIANS DAILY TREASURY; a Religious Exercise for 
every day in the year. By Rev. H. Temple. 12mo, cloth. $1.00.^ 

WREATH AROUND THE CROSS; or, Scripture Truths Illus- 
trated. By Rev. A. Morton Brown, D. D. 16mo, cloth. 60 cts. 

SCHOOL OF CHRIST; or, Christianity Viewed in its Leading As- 
pects. By Rev. A. R. L. Foote. 16mo, cloth. 50 cents. 

THE CHRISTIAN LIFE, Social and Individual. Peter Bayne. 
12mo, cloth. $1.25. 

THE PURITANS; or, The Church, Court, and Parliament of Eng- 
land. By Samuel Hopkins. In 3 vols., 8vo. Yol.I.,cl. ready. $2.50. 

MODERN A THEISM; its various forms. James Buchanan, D. D. 
12mo, cloth. $1.25. 

THE MISSION OF THE COMFORTER; with copious Notes. Ju- 
lius C Hare. American edition ; notes translated. 12mo, cl. $1.25. 

GOD REVEALED IN NATURE AND IN CHRIST. By Rev. 
James B. Walker. 12mo, cloth. $1.00. 

PHILOSOPHY OF THE PLAN OF SALVATION. New, im- 
proved, and enlarged edition. 12mo, cloth. 75 cents. 

YAHVEH CHRIST; or, The Memorial Name. By Alexander Mac- 
Whorter. Introductory Letter by Nathaniel W. Taylor, D. D. 
12mo, cloth. 60 cents. 

SALVATION BY CHRIST. By Francis Wayl and. 12mo, cl. $1. 

THE SUFFERING SAVIOUR; Last Days of Christ. Dr. Krum- 
macher. 12mo, cloth. $1.25. 

THE GREAT DAY OF ATONEMENT; or, Meditations and 
Prayers on the Sufferings and Death of our Lord. 75 cents. 

EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. Dr.JENKYN. 12mo,cl. $1.00. 

KEMP IS 1 S IMITATION OF CHRIST. Life by Ullman. 12mo, 
cloth. 85 cents. 

THE HAR VES T AND THE REAPERS. Home Work for all, and 
how to do it. By Rev. Harvey Newcomb. 16mo, cloth. 63 cts. 

(41) 



(RELIGIOUS,) 



LIMITS OF REL1G10 US THO UGH T EXAMINED. By Henry 
L. Mansel. Notes translated for American ed. 12mo, cl. $1.00. 

THE CR UCIBLE; or, Tests of a Regenerate State. By Rev. J. A. 
••■ Goodhue. Introduction by Dr. Kirk. 12mo, cloth, $1.00. 

LEADERS OF THE REFORMATION. Luther - Calvin — lati- 
mer— Knox. By John Tulloch, D. D. 12mo, cloth. $1.00. 

BAR ON S TO W. Christian Brotherhood. l6mo, cloth. 50 cts. 
— First Things. Development of Ch. Life. 60. 

JOHN ANGELL JAMES. Church Members Guide. Cl. S3 cts. 

— Church in Earnest. l8mo, cl. 40 cts. 

■ Christian Progress. l8mo, cl. 31. 

THE GREA T CONCERN. By ST. Adams, D. D. 12mo, cl. 85 cts. 

JOHN HARRIS'S WORKS. The Great Teacher. With an 
Introductory Essay by H. Humphrey, D. D. 12mo, cloth. 85 cts. 

— The Great Commission. With an In- 

troductory Essay by William R. Williams, D. D. 12mo, cl. $1.00. 

The Pre- Ad amite Earth. l2mo. 



cloth. $1.50. 

Man Primeval. l2mo, cloth. $1.25. 

Patriarchy. The Family. 12mo, cl. 



$1.25. 

Sermons, Charges, Addresses, tfc. 



Two volumes, octavo, cloth. $1.00 each. 

WILLIAM R.WILLIAMS. Religious Progress. 12mo, cl. 85. 
— : — The Lord's Prayer. l2mo, cl. 85. 

THE BETTER LAND. By Kev. A. C. Thompson. 12mo, cl. 85 els. 

EVENING OF LIFE. By J. Chaplin, D. D. 12mo, cloth. $1.00. 

HEA VEN. By James William Kimball. 12mo, cloth. $1.00. 

BAXTER'S SAINTS EVERLASTING REST. 16mo. cl. 50 cts. 

Us) 



(Stottftr anir ^hxtolxta 1$\\hlxmtxQn%, 



(BIOGRAPHICAL.) 



LIFE OF JOHN MILTON, in connection with the Political, Eccle- 
siastical, and Literary History of his time. By Dayid Masson, 
M. A. 3 vols., 8vo. Yol. I., cloth. §2.75. 

LIFE AND CORRESPONDENCE OF REV. DANIEL WIL- 
SON, D. D., late Bishop of Calcutta. By Rev. Josiah Batemas. 
"With portraits, map, and illustrations. 1 vol., royal octavo. §3.00. 

LIFE AND CORRESPONDENCE OF THE LATE AMOS 
LAWRENCE. By W. R. Lawrekce, M. D. 8vo, cloth. §1.50. 12mo, 
cloth. §1.00. 

DR. GRANT AND TEE MOUNTAIN NESTORIANS. By Rev. 
Thomas Laurie, his surviving associate. 12mo, cloth. §1.25. 

MEMOIR OF THE LIFE AND TIMES OF ISAAC BACKUS. 
By Alvah Hovey, D. D, 12ino, cloth. §1.25. 

LIFE OF JAMES MONTGOMERY. By Mrs. II. C. Knight, Au- 
thor of " Lady Huntington and her Friends." 12mo, cloth. §1.25. 

MY MOTHER; or, Recollections of Maternal Influence. By a New 
England Clergyman. 12mo, cloth. 75 cents. 

LIFE AND CORRESPONDENCE OF JOHN FOSTER. By 
John E. Ryland. 2 vols, in one, 12mo, cloth. §1.25. 

PHILIP DODDRIDGE. His Life and Labors. By John Stough- 
ton, D. D. 16mo, cloth. 60 cents. 

MEMOIR OF ANN H. JUDSON. By Rev. J. D. Kkowi.es. ISmo, 
cloth. 58 cents. 

MEMOIR OF GEORGE D. BOARDMAN. By Rev. A. King. 
Introduction by W. R. Williams, D. D. 12mo, cloth. 75 cents. 

LIFE OF GODFREY WILLIAM VON LEIBNITZ. By John 
M. Mackie. 16mo, cloth. 75 cents. 

TEACHER'S LAST LESSON; Memoir of Martha Whiting, of 
Charlestown Female Sem. By C. N. Badger. 12mo, cloth. §1.00. 

MEMOIR OF HENRIETTA SHUCK, the first Female Missionary 
to China. By Rev. J. B. Jeter, D. D. ISmo, cloth. 50 cents. 

MEMOIR OF REV. WILLIAM G. CROCKER, Missionary to 
West Africa. By R. B. Medbury. 18mo, cloth. 63 cents. 

(45) 



(RELIGIOUS,) 



GOTTHOLD'S EMBLEMS; or, Invisible Things Understood by 
Things that are Made. By Christian Scriver. Tr. from the 28th 
German Ed. by Rev. Robert Menzies. 8vo, cL, $1.00; fine ed. 1.50. 

THE STILL HOUR; or, Communion with God, By Prof. Austin 
Phelps, D. D., of Andover Theol. Seminary. 16mo, cl. 38 cts. 

LESSONS AT THE CROSS; or, Spiritual Truth Familiarly Ex- 
hibited in their Relations to Christ. By Samuel Hopkins. Intro- 
duction by George W. Blagden, D. D. 16mo, cloth. 75 cents. 

NEW ENGLAND THEOCRACY. From the German of Uhden. 
By H. C. Conant. Introduction by Neander. 12mo, cl. $1.00. 

EVENINGS WITH THE DOCTRINES. By Rev. Nehemiah 
Adams, D. D. 12mo, cloth. 

THE STATE OF THE IMPENITENT DEAD. By Alvah 
Hovey, D. D., Prof, in Newton Theol. Inst. 16mo, cloth. 50 cents. 

FOOTSTEPS OF OUR FOREFATHERS; what they Suffered and 
what they Sought. Describing Localities, Personages, and Events, 
in the Struggles for Religious Liberty. By James G. Mi all, Illus- 
trations. 12mo, cloth. $1.00. 

MEMORIALS OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY. Presenting, in a 
graphic form, Memorable Events of Early Ecclesiastical History, etc. 
By Rev. J. G. Miall. With Illustrations. 12mo, cloth. $1.00. 

THE MISSIONARY ENTERPRISE. The choicest Discourses in 
the language on Christian Missions, by distinguished American Au- 
thors. Edited by Baron Stow, D. D. 12mo, cloth. 85 cents. 

THE RELIGIONS OF THE WORLD ; their Relations to Chris- 
tianity. By Frederick Denison Maurice. 16mo, cloth. 60 cts. 

THE CHRISTIAN WORLD UNMASKED. By John Berridge, 
A. M. Life of the Author, by Thomas Guthrie, D. D. 16mo, cl. 50c. 

THE EXCELLENT WOMAN, described in the Book of Proverbs. 
With an Introduction by W. B. Sprague, D. D. Twenty-four 
splendid Illustrations. 12mo cloth. $1.00. 

M OTHERS OF THE WISE AND GOOD. By Jabez Burns, 
D. D. 16mo, cloth. 75 cents. 

THE SIGNET-RING, and its Heavenly Motto. From the German. 
Illustrated. 16mo, cloth, gilt. 31 cents. 

THE MARRIAGE-RING ; or, How to Make Home Happy. John 
Angell James. Illustrated ed. 16mo, cloth, gilt. 75 cents, 

(33) 



(LITERARY.) 



THE PURITANS; or, the Court, Church, and Parliament of Eng- 
land. By Samuel Hopkins. 3 vols., 8vo, cloth. $2.50 per vol. 

HISTORICAL EVIDENCES OF THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIP- 
TURE RECORDS, STATED ANEW, with Special Reference to 
the Doubts and Discoveries of Modern Times. Bampton Lecture 
for 1859. By George Rawlinson. 12mo, cloth. $1.00. 

CHRIST IN HIS TOBY. By Robert Turnbull, D. D. A New 
and Enlarged Edition. 12mo, cloth. $1.25. 

THE CHRISTIAN LIFE; Social and Individual. By Peter 
Bayne. 12mo, cloth. $1.25. 

ESSAYS IN BIOGRAPHY AND CRITICISM. By Peter Bayne. 
Arranged in two series, or parts. 2 vols., 12mo, cloth. $1.25 each. 

THE GREYSON LETTERS. By Henry Rogers, Author of the 
"Eclipse of Faith." 12mo, cloth. $1.25. 

CHAMBERS' WORKS. Cyclopaedia of English Literature. 
Selections from English Authors, from the earliest to the present 
time. 2 vols., 8vo, cloth. $5.00. 

Miscellany of Useful and Enter- 

taining Knowledge. 10 vols., 
16mo, cloth. $7.50. 

HOME BOOK; or, Pocket Miscellany. 6 

vols. 16mo, cloth. $3.00. 

MISCELLANIES. By William R. Williams, D. D. 12mo, cl. $1.25. 

ANCIENT LITERATURE AND ART. Essays and Letters from 
Eminent Philologists. By Profs. Sears, Edwards, and Felton. 
12mo, cloth. $1.25. 

MODERN FRENCH LITERATURE. By L. Raymond De Veri- 
cour. Revised, with Notes by W. S. Chase. 12mo, cloth. $1.25. 

BRITISH NOVELISTS AND THEIR STYLES. By David 
Masson, M. A., Author of Life of Milton. 16mo, cloth. 75 cents. 

THE HALLIG ; or, the Sheepfold in the Waters. Translated from 
the German of Biernatski, by Mrs. George P. Marsh. 12mo, 
cloth. $1.00. 

MANSEDS MISCELLANIES; including " Prolegomina Logica," 
"Metaphysics," " Limits of Demonstrative Evidence," "Philosophy 
of Kant," etc. 12mo. Inpress. 



dbultr anl* Almoin b l§uhluufxmxB< 

(SABBATH SCHOOL,) 



POPULAR CYCLOPAEDIA OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
Condensed, by J. Kitto, D. D. Numerous Illustrations. 8vo. $3.00. 

THE HISTORY OF PALESTINE; its Geography and Natural 
History, its Customs and Institutions. By John Kitto, D. D. 
With Illustrations. 12mo. $1.25. 

ANALYTICAL CONCORDANCE TO THE SCRIPTURES; or, 
The Bible under Distinct, Classified Topics. By John Eadie, D. D. 
8vo. $3.00. 

CRUDEN'S CONDENSED CONCORDANCE. 870. $1.25 and 1.50. 

COMMENTARY ON THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE ACTS 
of the Apostles. By H. B. Hackett, D. D. 8vo. $2.25. 

ILLUSTRATIONS OF SCRIPTURE. Suggested by a tour through 
the Holy Land. With Illustrations. New, enlarged edition. By 
H. B. Hackett, D. D. 12mo, cloth. $1.00. 

PROF. H. J. RIPLEY'S NOTES. 

On THE GOSPELS. For Sab- 
bath Schools, Family Instruction, etc. Map of Canaan. Cloth. $1.25. 
On the Acts of the Apos- 



tles. With Map of Travels of the Apostle Paul. 12mo, cloth. 75cts- 
On the Epistle of Paul 



TO THE ROMANS, 12mo, cloth, embossed. 67 cents. 

COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
Explanatory, Doctrinal, and Practical. By R. E. Pattison, D. D. 
12mo. 85 cents. 

MAL COM'S NEW BIBLE DICTION AR Y of Names, Objects, and 
Terms found in the Holy Scriptures. By Howard Malcom, D. D. 
lGmo, cloth. 60 cents. 

HARMONY QUESTIONS ON THE FOUR GOSPELS, for the 
use of Sabbath Schools. By S. B. Swaim, D. D. Vol. I. 18mo, 
cloth backs. 13 cents. 

SABBATH SCHOOL CLASS-BOOK. By E. Lincoln. 13 cents. 

LINCOLN'S SCRIPTURE QUESTIONS; with Answers. 8 cts. 

THE SABBATH SCHOOL HARMONY; with appropriate Hymns 
and Music for Sabbath Schools. By N. D.Gould. 13 cents. 

EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY, as exhibited in the writings of 
its apologists, down to Augustine. By Prof. W. J. Bolton. 12mo, 
cloth. 80 cents. 

(50) 



cx>^7 



) <^J^nPU , 3s~. P^cjfa J 





gtttomtMttflnal 98orft& 



Progress of Baptist Principles in the Last Hundred 

Years. By T. F. Cuktis, Prof, of Theol. in Lewisburg Univ., Pa. 

12mo. Cloth. $1.25. 

Eminently worthy of the attention, not only of Baptists, but of all other 
denominations. In his preface the author declares that his aim has been to 
draw a wide distinction between parties and opinions. Hence the object of 
this volume is not to exhibit or defend the Baptists, but their principles. It 
is confidently pronounced the best exhibition of Baptist views and prin- 
ciples extant. 

History of American Baptist Missions, in Asia, Africa, 

Europe, and North America, from their earliest commencement to the 
present time. Prepared under the direction of the American Baptist Mis- 
sionary Union. By William Gammell, Prof, in Brown University. 
"With seven Maps. 12mo. Cloth. 75 cts. 

Church-Member's Manual of Ecclesiastical Principles, 

Doctrines, and Discipline. By William Crowell, D.D. Introduction 
by H. J. Ripley, D. D. 12mo. Cloth. 75 cts. 

Church-Member's Hand Book; a Plain Guide to the 

Doctrines and Practice of Baptist Churches. By the Rev. William 
Crowell, D. D. 18mo. Cloth. 38 cts. 

Memoir of the Life and Times of Isaac Backus. 

By Alvah Hovey, Prof, of Eccle. History, Newton Theol. Institution. 

I2mo. Cloth. $1.25. 

An account of a remarkable man, and of a remarkable movement in the 
middle of the last century, resulting in the formation of what were called 
the "Separate" Churches. It supplies an important deficiency in the his- 
tory of New England affairs. For every Baptist, especially, it is a necessary 
book. 

Memoir of Roger Williams, Founder of the State of 

Rhode Island. By Prof. Wm. Gammell, A. M. lGmo. Cloth. 75 cts. 
Historical Vindications; or, the Province and Uses of 

Baptist History. With Appendixes containing Historical Notes and Con- 
fessions of Faith. By S. S. Cutting, D. D., Prof, in the University of 
Rochester. 1 Jmo. Cloth. 75 cts. 

An admirable contribution to Baptist History, tracing the origin and rapid 
growth of Baptist principles in England at the time of the Reformation, and 
suggesting important lessons for future guidance. The Appendixes contain 
historical facts worth twofold the piice of the volume. 

Exclusiveness of the Baptists; an Examination of Dr. 

Albert Barnes on " Exclusivism." By H. J. Ripley, Prof. Newton Theo. 
Inst. 16mo. Printed cover. 10 cts. 

A kind yet manly and most triumphant refutation of Dr. Barnes' serious 
charges against the Baptists of" Exclusivism," etc. 

Prerequisites to Communion ; or, the Scriptural Terms of 

Admission to the Lord's Supper. By the Rev. A. N. Arnold, D.D. 
16mo. Cloth, 38 cts. Printed cover, 20 cts. 

Essay on Christian Baptism. By Baptist W. Noel. 

With fine steel Portrait of the Author. 16mo. Cloth. 60 cts. 

Bible Baptism. A beautiful Steel Engraving, nine by twelve 
inches in size, representing in the centre a Church, a Baptismal Scene, 
&c, and in the marain are arranged all the texts of Scripture found in the 
New Test>ment alluding to the subject of Baptism. An elegant orna- 
mental picture for the parlor. 25 cts. 

Jewett on Baptism. The Mode and Subjects of Baptism. 

By Milo P. Jewett, late Minister of the Presbyterian Church. Twelfth 
thousand. Cloth. 25 cts. 

Judson on Christian Baptism; with many Quotations 

from Pedobaptist Authors. By Adontram Judsost, D. D. Fifth edition, 
revised and enlarged. Cloth. 23 cts. 

(ff) 

TS L ^ ^ ^ ==: ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ .rtr:rTz. ^ J ) 



V 



Wwy^^^yy^^w^^^^^^ 



WW 



mmmmmmmmmm, 



*mmmm 



vmvwvywwyyrrv 






J VWr; v Vv 



m^^m 



^fefeyyww; 



MWy 



MKS?w W vj 



v ^^u 



WMW^M 






Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Sept. 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEAOER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 






jCMvyppy 



/VW< 



iTCOBHMr^ 



WVVW' 



" ^WVwvvu:,w-v^WWUW 












^ww%'y»u 







i^wvuuvvUMAA 



^VUv 



W 



vwjjibii^^ 



